Criminal threats to officials in the administration of the Children Criminal Justice System (SPPA) as listed in Article 96, Article 100, and Article 101 of Law No. 11 Year 2012 on the Criminal Justice System Child declared unconstitutional by the Constitutional Court. So the verdict number 110/PUU-X/2012 was read by Chief Justice Moh Mahfud MD on Thursday (28/3) at the Plenary Court.

"To grant the petition of the petitioner entirely. Article 96, Article 100, and Article 101 of Law No. 11 Year 2012 on the Criminal Justice System Child against the Constitution of 1945," said Mahfud.

In the opinion of the Court that the Constitution was read by Justice Anwar Usman, the Court considered that Article 96, Article 100, and Article 101 of Law 11/2012 which determines criminal threats to officials in the administration of the SPPA, the judges, court officials, investigators, and prosecutors. According to the Court, said Anwar, not just not formulate constitutional provisions regarding the freedom and independence of judicial power specifically related officials (judges, prosecutors, investigators and child), which provides legal guarantees for the implementation of an independent judiciary, but more than that too has made criminalization of administrative violations in the administration of the SPPA would negatively impact the particular officials who hold SPPA.

Anwar said the negative impact is the psychological impact that is not necessary, in the form of fears and concerns in the implementation of tasks in prosecuting a case. It thus create legal uncertainty and injustice which means contrary to Article 28D paragraph (1) of the 1945 Constitution and counterproductive to the intent to hold SPPA with its diversion effectively and efficiently within the framework of restorative justice. "Based on all the above considerations arguments of the Petitioners in testing the constitutionality of Article 96, Article 100, and Article 101 of Law 11/2012 of the 1945 Constitution legally groundless," said Anwar.

Petitioner in his petition argued that Article 96, Article 100, and Article 101 of Law Juvenile Justice System does not have a clear purpose and is not accompanied by efforts to criminalize the consideration of the objectives to be achieved. Criminalization of politics in defining the act as an offense under the provisions of Article 96, Article 100, and Article 101 of Law SPPA no longer oriented to the policy (policy-oriented approach) and in value (value judgment approach). Such provisions do not contain the principles of criminalization, and the purpose of punishment / presence / function of criminal law, so that the formulation of the provision does not reflect the principle of justice. (Lulu Anjarsari / mh)