Peer-reviewed article
Issue of Judicial Consideration in Acquittal (Vrijspraak) : Cases of Sexual Violence Against Children
Novita Cahyaningrum, Gelar Ali Ahmad ·
Summary
Written by AI, not yet AICS's view · claude-haiku-4-5-20251001This legal analysis examines a judicial acquittal in an Indonesian sexual violence case against a child, arguing that the judge's decision was based on general legal principles rather than specific child protection legislation. The study uses normative legal methods to critique the panel's reasoning and recommends stronger enforcement of child protection laws. The work does not evaluate an intervention or measure outcomes related to child well-being.
Key points
- Acts of sexual violence against children in Indonesia continue to rise annually
- A specific acquittal case (329/Pid.Sus/2024/PN Jap) was decided using general criminal procedure rules rather than specific child protection laws
- The judges applied Article 183 KUHAP instead of Article 25 TPKS Law, violating the legal principle 'Lex Specialis Derogat Legi Generali'
- The study recommends that law enforcement officials and judges update their understanding and implementation of child protection laws
Limitations
This is a legal critique of a single court decision based on document analysis, not an empirical study. It provides no data on the prevalence of acquittals in child sexual violence cases, the outcomes for child victims, or the effectiveness of proposed legal reforms.
Abstract
Acts of sexual violence against children in Indonesia continue to rise each year. This situation is triggered by victims' fear of reporting and attempts by perpetrators to silence them, especially when perpetrators have certain powers or positions. This crucial phenomenon is evident in the acquittal of Case Number 329/Pid.Sus/2024/PN Jap. The panel of judges' considerations were based solely on Article 183 KUHAP without considering Article 25 TPKS Law. This study uses a normative juridical method through a literature study of primary and secondary legal sources, which are analyzed descriptively and qualitatively. The purpose of the study is to examine the basis for the judge's decision, which contradicts the objectives of the law, as well as the legal consequences and solutions. The results of the study show that the panel of judges relied more on general rules than specific rules, thereby contradicting the principles of Lex Specialis Derogat Legi Generali and Testimonium de auditu. Therefore, it is recommended that law enforcement officials and judges progressively update their understanding of the law and implement preventive and repressive legal protection measures so that acquittal do not become a form of impunity for criminals.