KONSEP PERSYARATAN DIVERSI SESUAI PRINSIP THE BEST INTEREST OF THE CHILD
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.32832/yustisi.v13i3.24159Abstrak
Diversi merupakan instrumen penting dalam Sistem Peradilan Pidana Anak yang bertujuan melindungi anak dari dampak negatif proses peradilan melalui pendekatan keadilan restoratif. Namun, Pasal 7 ayat (2) Undang-Undang Nomor 11 Tahun 2012 tentang Sistem Peradilan Pidana Anak membatasi penerapan diversi hanya terhadap tindak pidana yang diancam pidana penjara di bawah tujuh tahun dan bukan pengulangan tindak pidana. Pembatasan tersebut menimbulkan persoalan karena belum tentu sejalan dengan prinsip kepentingan terbaik bagi anak. Penelitian ini bertujuan menganalisis dasar filosofis dan yuridis pembatasan syarat diversi, menilai kesesuaiannya dengan prinsip the best interests of the child, serta merumuskan konsep pembaruan syarat diversi yang lebih adaptif. Penelitian menggunakan metode hukum normatif dengan pendekatan perundang-undangan dan konseptual. Bahan hukum diperoleh dari peraturan perundang-undangan, instrumen internasional hak anak, literatur, dan artikel ilmiah yang relevan. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa pembatasan diversi berdasarkan ancaman pidana dan status residivisme masih berorientasi pada karakteristik tindak pidana, sehingga belum sepenuhnya mencerminkan kebutuhan perlindungan anak. Maka syarat diversi perlu direformulasi melalui asesmen individual yang mempertimbangkan kondisi psikologis, tingkat kematangan, risiko residivisme, dukungan keluarga dan lingkungan sosial, kepentingan korban, serta prospek rehabilitasi anak guna mewujudkan sistem diversi yang lebih adil dan berorientasi pada perlindungan anak.
Kata kunci: diversi; sistem peradilan pidana anak; kepentingan terbaik bagi anak; keadilan restoratif; reformulasi hukum.
Referensi
Ananta, A. R. R., Wicaksono, D. B., Berliansyah, D. T., & Lestari, D. (2025). Criminal Limitations on Diversion of Children Against the Law Based on the Juvenile Criminal Justice System from a Comparative Perspective. Jurnal Penegakan Hukum Dan Keadilan, 6(2), 130–142. https://doi.org/10.18196/jphk.v6i2.26234
April, K., Schrader, S. W., Walker, T. E., Francis, R. M., Glynn, H., & Gordon, D. M. (2023). Conceptualizing juvenile justice reform: Integrating the public health, social ecological, and restorative justice models. Children and Youth Services Review, 148, 106887. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2023.106887
Convention on the Rights of the Child, Adopted 20 November 1989 (1990).
Dewi, A. D., & Purwandari, E. (2024). KEHARMONISAN KELUARGA, INTEGRASI SOSIAL, LOKUS KENDALI, DAN KESEJAHTERAAN PSIKOLOGIS ANAK YANG BERHADAPAN DENGAN HUKUM: Family Harmony, Social Integration, Locus of Control, and Psychological Wellbeing of Children in Conflict With Law. Jurnal Ilmu Keluarga dan Konsumen, 17(1), 90–102. https://doi.org/10.24156/jikk.2024.17.1.90
Faisal, F., & Rahayu, D. P. (2021). REFORMULASI SYARAT DIVERSI: KAJIAN IDE DASAR SISTEM PERADILAN PIDANA ANAK. Masalah-Masalah Hukum, 50(3), 331–338. https://doi.org/10.14710/mmh.50.3.2021.331-338
Fox, R., & Freiberg, A. (1990). Ranking offence seriousness in reviewing statutory maximum penalties. Australian & New Zealand Journal of Criminology, 23(3), 165–191. https://doi.org/10.1177/000486589002300303
Garayová, L. (2024). The Best Interests of the Child Principle.
Kikuchi, Y., Senju, A., Tojo, Y., Osanai, H., & Hasegawa, T. (2009). Faces Do Not Capture Special Attention in Children With Autism Spectrum Disorder: A Change Blindness Study. Child Development, 80(5), 1421–1433. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8624.2009.01342.x
Lipsey, M. W. (2009). The Primary Factors that Characterize Effective Interventions with Juvenile Offenders: A Meta-Analytic Overview. Victims & Offenders, 4(2), 124–147. https://doi.org/10.1080/15564880802612573
Lowenkamp, C. T., Latessa, E. J., & Holsinger, A. M. (2006). The Risk Principle in Action: What Have We Learned From 13,676 Offenders and 97 Correctional Programs? Crime & Delinquency, 52(1).
Miller, L. (2014). Juvenile crime and juvenile justice: Patterns, models, and implications for clinical and legal practice. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 19(2), 122–137. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.avb.2014.01.005
Ozkan, T. (2016). Reoffending among serious juvenile offenders: A developmental perspective. Journal of Criminal Justice, 46, 18–31. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcrimjus.2016.02.017
Pradityo, R. (2016). RESTORATIVE JUSTICE DALAM SISTEM PERADILAN PIDANA ANAK. Jurnal Hukum Dan Peradilan, 5(3). https://www.jurnalhukumdanperadilan.org/jurnalhukumperadilan/article/view/25
Putri, C. C. I. (2019). Juridical Review of Restorative Justice in the Juvenile Justice System through Diversion. IJCLS (Indonesian Journal of Criminal Law Studies), 4(1), 1–8. https://doi.org/10.15294/ijcls.v4i1.18680
Steinberg, L. (2008). A social neuroscience perspective on adolescent risk-taking. Developmental Review, 28(1), 78–106. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dr.2007.08.002
Syihabuddin, I. (2026). Kajian Kriminologi Kejahatan Anak Pelaku Kekerasan Seksual dalam Hukum Positif Indonesia. 6(1).
Teplin, L. A. (2010). Psychiatric Disorders in Youth in Juvenile Detention.
UN. Committee on the Rights of the Child (Ed.). (29). General comment no. 14 (2013) on the right of the child to have his or her best interests taken as primary consideration (art. 3, para. 1). UN. https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/778523
Undang-Undang No. 11 Tahun 2012 Tentang Sistem Peradilan Pidana Anak (2012).
Undang-Undang Nomor 1 Tahun 2023 Tentang Kitab Undang-Undang Hukum Pidana.
Walim, W., Santoso, M. I., Haryono, W. S., & Marbun, R. (2024). The Regulation of Diversion in Indonesia’s Juvenile Criminal Justice System Oriented Toward the Best Interests of the Child And Fairness. Rechtsnormen: Journal of Law, 2(3). https://doi.org/10.70177/rjl.v2i3.1280
Waluyadi, Muslikhahi, & Mariana, M. (2024). When Diversion Fails: How The System Betrays the Best Interests of Children in Conflict with the Law. Pandecta Research Law Journa, 19(2).
Wilson, H. A., & Hoge, R. D. (2013). The Effect of Youth Diversion Programs on Recidivism: A Meta-Analytic Review. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 40(5), 497–518. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093854812451089
