COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF THE FUNCTIONS OF PROBATION OFFICERS IN CONDITIONAL SENTENCES UNDER THE FORMER CRIMINAL CODE AND SUPERVISION AND COMMUNITY SERVICE SENTENCES UNDER THE NATIONAL CRIMINAL CODE
(A STUDY AT THE CLASS I PROBATION OFFICE OF BANDAR LAMPUNG)
-
Fahrurozi Saputra(1*)
Program Studi Magister Hukum, Universitas Bandar Lampung
-
Erlina Bachri(2)
Program Studi Magister Hukum, Universitas Bandar Lampung
(*) Corresponding Author
Abstract
The development of sentencing policy in Indonesia reflects a paradigm shift from imprisonment-oriented punishment toward supervision-based and social reintegration–oriented sanctions. This shift is evident in the comparison between conditional sentences under the former Indonesian Criminal Code (KUHP) and supervision and community service sentences under the National Criminal Code, which has significant implications for the functions of Community Counselors. This study aims to analyze and compare the functions of Community Counselors in the implementation of conditional sentences under the former KUHP with their roles in supervision and community service sentences under the National Criminal Code, with a case study conducted at the Class I Probation Office of Bandar Lampung. The research employs a normative juridical method with statutory and conceptual approaches, supported by empirical data obtained through interviews and document analysis. The findings indicate that under the former KUHP, the role of Community Counselors was largely administrative, focusing on monitoring compliance with sentencing conditions with limited scope for social guidance. In contrast, the National Criminal Code expands the role of Community Counselors to include guidance, supervision, mentoring, and evaluation in the implementation of supervision and community service sentences. This expanded role positions Community Counselors as key actors in the success of non-custodial sanctions aimed at rehabilitation and social reintegration. The study concludes that the sentencing reform under the National Criminal Code necessitates the strengthening of institutional capacity and human resources of Community Counselors to ensure the effective realization of humane and restorative sentencing objectives.
Keywords: Community Counselors; Conditional Sentences; Supervision Sentences; Community Service Sentences; Former Criminal Code; National Criminal Code
Downloads
References
Arif, B. (2024). Restorative Justice in Resolution of Child Crimes. Journal of Southeast Asian Human Rights, Vol. 7, Issue 2, hlm. 3.
Audrey, S. (2025, Agustus). Kondisi Overcapacity Lapas hingga Rutan di Indonesia Capai 93 Persen. Diakses dari https://news.detik.com/berita/d-8056099/kondisi-overcapacity-lapas-hingga-rutan-di-indonesia-capai-93-persen.
Barda, N. A. (2017). Bunga Rampai Kebijakan Hukum Pidana. Jakarta: Kencana.
Erlina, B., & Anggalana. (2021). Pertanggungjawaban Pidana Pelaku Penganiayaan secara Bersama-sama Terhadap Orang di Muka Umum yang Menyebabkan Luka (Studi Perkara Nomor: 6/Pid.B/2018/PN.Sdn Tahun 2018). Jurnal Pro Justitia, Vol. 2, No. 2.
Hendi, S. B., & Asri, A. (2024). Peran dan Fungsi Balai Pemasyarakatan dalam Pembimbingan Kemasyarakatan Pada Fase Pra Ajudikasi dalam Integrated Criminal Justice System Sejak Berlakunya Undang-Undang Nomor 22 Tahun 2022 Tentang Pemasyarakatan. Jurnal Pendidikan Dasar dan Sosial Humaniora, Vol. 2, hlm. 6–7.
Konrad, Z., & Hein, K. (1998). Introduction to Comparative Law. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Lawrence M. Friedman. (1975). The Legal System: A Social Science Perspective. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
Muladi & Barda Nawawi Arief. (2010). Teori-teori dan Kebijakan Pidana. Bandung: Alumni.
Muladi. (1998). Teori dan Kebijakan Pidana. Bandung: Alumni.
Muladi. (2019), “Implementasi Pendekatan Keadilan Restoratif Justice dalam Sistem Peradilan Pidana Anak.” Jurnal Pembaharuan Hukum Pidana Universitas Diponegoro, Vol. 2 No. 2 : 83.
René, D. & John, E.C. B. (1985). Major Legal Systems in the World Today. London: Stevens & Sons.
Romli, A. (2011). Sistem Peradilan Pidana Kontemporer. Jakarta: Kencana.
Satjipto, R., (2009), Hukum Progresif: Hukum yang Membebaskan, (Jakarta: Kompas, 2009), hlm. 45–47.
Soerjono, S. (1983). Faktor-Faktor yang Mempengaruhi Penegakan Hukum. Jakarta: Rajawali Pers.
Soerjono, S. (1983). Sosiologi: Suatu Pengantar. Jakarta: Rajawali Pers.
Soerjono, S. (2014). Faktor-Faktor yang Mempengaruhi Penegakan Hukum. RajaGrafindo Persada, Jakarta.
Sudarto. (1983). Hukum Pidana dan Perkembangan Masyarakat. Bandung: Sinar Baru.
Sudarto. (1986). Hukum dan Hukum Pidana. Bandung: Alumni.
Topo, S. dan Eva, A. Z. 2011. Kriminologi. RajaGrafindo Persada, Jakarta.
Topo, S. (2019). Keadilan Restoratif dalam Pembaruan Sistem Pemidanaan di Indonesia. Jakarta: Rajawali Pers.
Undang-Undang Nomor 1 Tahun 1946 Tentang Kitab Undang-Undang Hukum Pidana
Undang-Undang Nomor 22 Tahun 2022 tentang Sistem Pemasyarakatan
Undang-Undang Republik Indonesia Nomor 1 Tahun 2023 Tentang Kitab Undang-Undang Hukum Pidana
Nasional
Undang-Undang Republik Indonesia Nomor 11 keTahun 2012 tentang Sistem Peradilan Pidana Anak, Pasal 7 butir 13.
Wamenkum: Jenis Putusan Pengadilan pada KUHAP Baru akan Bertambah. Tempo.co, 16 Maret 2025. Diakses 22 April 2025 dari: https://www.tempo.co/hukum/wamenkum-jenis-putusan-pengadilan-pada-kuhap-baru-akan-bertambah-1220332
Yasmin, A. J. & Eko, R. P. W. (2020). The Role of Parole Officer for Clients in Probation Office in a Systematic Literature Review. Journal of Humanities and Social Studies, Vol. 4, hlm. 7–9
Zuwirda. 2015. Kerangka Konseling Psikososial dengan Menggunakan Terapi Cuento (Pendekatan Kelompok). Al-Taujih I (Konseling), Jawa Tengah.
