Construction of Guilty Pleas and Ability of Criminal Responsibility

Abstract

That is the context of criminal law enforcement that departs from the principle of "no criminal without fault" and/or "no criminal responsibility without fault", then there are fundamental problems, related to the assessment of the objectivity of an action on the one hand, and the subjectivity of the perpetrator on the other . Which means that, in fact, an "act" can be seen physically and concretely, whereas, with regard to "fault" that is, it must be extracted from the intention and inner state of the perpetrator, then someone who is convicted and has a sense that can be held to hold criminal responsibility. Whereas, in the concept of "Guilty Pleas or Plead of guilty", it is known that a guilty plea can be used by a Judge in imposing a sentence on someone, and with that acknowledgment, someone is deemed to have declared a "fault" in his inner attitude. Thus, when linked to the concept of criminal justice, the condition of error by trial is very likely to occur, considering that one of the objectives of the judiciary is to seek material truth. Therefore, the authors formulate a problem: (a) How is the construction of a "guilty plea" with the ability of criminal liability to be viewed in terms of the objectivity of a criminal act and the factor of the subjectivity of a criminal offender? (b) Can someone who has committed a "guilty plea" be computed in the context of punishment?