La Promesa Del Fiscal en La Ejecución Del Cese De Demanda Basado en La Justicia Restaurativa

Abstract

Objective: The prosecutor's power to stop the trial on the basis of restorative justice is an expression of the principle of separation, which is rooted in Pancasila and serves as the cornerstone of the Indonesian nation's state and ideology. This authority is also responsible for supporting easy, fast and affordable legal proceedings and implementing the principle of remedium ultimum. Theoretical Framework: The study addresses the power of the Public Prosecutor's Office to suspend prosecution for specific criminal offenses, such as loss of property and damage to physical property, based on restorative justice. Method: This research approach, known as normative jurisprudence, employs secondary data to do legal analysis of the problem's subject matter utilizing the law and a few court decisions. Results and conclusion: The findings of the investigation reveal that the prosecutor's authority to stop the case on the basis of restorative justice is based on the values of Pancasila, the dominus litis, and the opportunist. In short, the prosecutor's ability to stop trials based on principles of restorative justice is optional rather than necessary. This procedure is based on the provisions of the Prosecutor's Rules. Implication of the research: The prosecutor's power is in violation of the core tenet of criminal law if they pressure the offenders and victims to reconcile, as making peace does not absolve the criminal element. Originality/value: that the exercise of authority by the prosecutor should not be strictly defended; instead, they should act as mediators, offering advice and advice so that the parties to the conflict can decide whether to pursue a peaceful settlement for certain crimes, such as physical and property crimes. If the victim refuses to negotiate a peace settlement, the case must undergo further investigation to get a judge's verdict.