The Paradigm of Meaningful Guilty Pleas: Balancing Procedural Efficiency and Substantive Justice in the Indonesian Criminal Justice System
Abstract
This study is motivated by the systemic dysfunction of the Indonesian criminal justice system, characterized by case backlogs and overcrowding in correctional institutions. This condition prompted the adoption of the plea bargain mechanism in Article 78 of the New Criminal Procedure Code. However, the application of this special track potentially becomes trapped in procedural pragmatism that neglects the search for material truth and the essence of substantive justice. The objective of this study is to formulate the Meaningful Guilty Plea paradigm as a synchronization instrument between the procedural efficiency of Article 78 of the New Criminal Procedure Code and substantive justice values in the sentencing guidelines of Article 54 of the New Penal Code. The research method used is normative legal research, employing statutory, conceptual, and comparative approaches through qualitative-prescriptive analysis. The results indicate that plea bargain formalism requires a rigid material foundation so that granting sentence reduction is not speculative-transactional in nature. The construction of the meaningful guilty plea paradigm requires examining the quality of the defendant’s statement, based on indicators of sincere remorse, moral responsibility, and commitment to victim recovery, to ensure sentencing proportionality. This synchronization enables a transition from a retributive pattern to a restorative-corrective model, as mandated by the New Penal Code. The conclusion asserts that procedural efficiency must be governed by active judicial control, achieved through the integration of sentencing guidelines to prevent judicial decision-making disparities. This study recommends the formulation of implementing regulations in the form of sentencing guidelines that integrate the plea-bargaining mechanism nationwide as a crucial implementation step following the recent enforcement of the new criminal law on January 2, 2026. Under this ideal model, the criminal justice system is expected to achieve sustainable harmony between the speed of processes and the quality of decisions that are substantively just for both the defendant and the victim.
Downloads
References
Arafat, M. (2025). Paradigma Pemidanaan Baru dalam KUHP 2023: Alternatif Sanksi dan Transformasi Sistem Peradilan Pidana Indonesia. Jurnal Ilmu Hukum, 2(1), 33-46. https://doi.org/10.58540/jih.v2i1.1047
Arum, S. K. K., & Maulidah, K. (2025). Pembaruan Hukum Pidana Melalui Penerapan Prinsip Insignifikansi: Kajian dalam KUHP Baru Indonesia. Jurnal Hukum Ekualitas, 1(1), 57-69. https://doi.org/10.56607/73krj443
Awanadi, I. G. A. V., & Zulkarnain, I. G. A. K. K. (2025). Konsep Jalur Khusus Terkait dengan Kekuasaan Kehakiman dalam Sistem Peradilan Pidana Indonesia. Locus: Jurnal Konsep Ilmu Hukum, 5(2), 92-103. Retrieved from https://jurnal.locusmedia.id/index.php/jkih/article/view/449
Fatoni, S., Rusdiana, E., Rosyadi, I., & Rozikin, O. (2025). Asas Proporsionalitas: Perspektif Hukum Positif dan Maqosid Syariah dalam Sistem Peradilan Pidana. Jurnal Hukum Ius Quia Iustum, 32(1), 46-71. https://doi.org/10.20885/iustum.vol32.iss1.art3
Frans, M. P., Sari, A. I. I., Winda, D., Alfret, A., & Simeone, N. G. F. (2024). Plea Bargaining System, Deffered Prosecution Agreement, dan Judicial Scrutiny sebagai Upaya Mengatasi Overkapasitas Lembaga Pemasyarakatan. Perspektif Hukum, 24(2), 147-173. https://doi.org/10.30649/ph.v24i2.273
Fratama, R. A. (2020). Jalur Khusus (Plea Bargaining) dalam Hukum Acara Pidana. Badamai Law Journal, 5(2), 230-241. https://doi.org/10.32801/damai.v5i2.10755
Haeranah, H., Mirzana, H. A., Anas, A. M. A., Iskandar, I., & Arifin, A. P. (2025). The Concept of Plea Bargain in the Criminal Process System in Indonesia. Law Reform, 21(1), 1-16. https://doi.org/10.14710/lr.v21i1.66764
Hermawati, R. (2023). Studi Perbandingan Hukum “Plea Bargaining System” di Amerika Serikat dengan “Jalur Khusus” di Indonesia. Jurnal Hukum Lex Generalis, 4(1), 102-115. https://doi.org/10.56370/jhlg.v4i1.351
Hiariej, E. O. S., & Santoso, T. (2025). Anotasi KUHP Nasional. PT. Raja Grafindo Persada.
Hikmah, F., & Agustian, R. A. (2023). Konvergensi Konsep Retribusi dan Rehabilitasi dalam Filsafat Hukum Pidana Kontemporer Indonesia. Crepido, 5(2), 217-228. https://doi.org/10.14710/crepido.5.2.217-228
Idris, M. F. (2025). Tahapan Peradilan Pidana. Yayasan Prima Agus Teknik Bekerja Sama dengan Universitas STEKOM.
Irmawanti, N. D., & Arief, B. N. (2021). Urgensi Tujuan dan Pedoman Pemidanaan dalam Rangka Pembaharuan Sistem Pemidanaan Hukum Pidana. Jurnal Pembangunan Hukum Indonesia, 3(2), 217-227. https://doi.org/10.14710/jphi.v3i2.217-227
Irwansyah. (2020). Penelitian Hukum: Pilihan Metode & Praktik Penulisan Artikel. Mirra Buana Media.
Kadir, A., & Juniarti, A. W. (2024). Guilty Pleas Through Special Channels as an Effort to Reform Criminal Procedure Law in Indonesia. International Journal of Accounting, Management, Economics and Social Sciences (IJAMESC), 2(5), 1894-1904. https://doi.org/10.61990/ijamesc.v2i5.298
Kadri, K., Syamsuddin, S., & Ilham. (2025). Modifikasi Tujuan Pemidanaan Pada Kitab Undang-Undang Hukum Pidana (KUHP) Baru Prespektif Keadilan Sosial. Jurnal Hukum & Pembangunan Masyarakat, 17(5), 54-60. Retrieved from https://jurnalhost.com/index.php/jhpm/article/view/2740
Khaidarulloh, K. (2023). Akomodasi Common Law System dalam KUHP Baru: Konsep Hukuman Kerja Sosial sebagai Alternatif Pidana. El-Dusturie, 2(2), 117-131. https://doi.org/10.21154/el-dusturie.v2i2.7496
Laia, F. F. D. (2024). The Urgency of Enacting Government Regulation on Community Service Sentence in Indonesian under the New Penal Code. SIGn Jurnal Hukum, 6(1), 1-16. https://doi.org/10.37276/sjh.v6i1.350
Latif, B., Noor, S. M., Sumardi, J., & Irwansyah, I. (2019). Environmental Damage Caused by Corruption Cases Involving Trade and Investment: Rock to Bottom View. In H. Kamaruddin et al. (Eds.), Proceedings of the International Conference on Law, Environment and Society (ICLES 2018) (pp. 197-205). Future Academy. https://doi.org/10.15405/epsbs.2019.10.22
Law of the Republic of Indonesia Number 8 of 1981 on the Criminal Procedure Code (State Gazette of the Republic of Indonesia of 1981 Number 76, Supplement to the State Gazette of the Republic of Indonesia Number 3209). https://www.dpr.go.id/dokumen/jdih/undang-undang/detail/755
Law of the Republic of Indonesia Number 16 of 2004 on the Attorney General’s Office of the Republic of Indonesia (State Gazette of the Republic of Indonesia of 2004 Number 67, Supplement to the State Gazette of the Republic of Indonesia Number 4401). https://www.dpr.go.id/dokumen/jdih/undang-undang/detail/17
Law of the Republic of Indonesia Number 11 of 2021 on Amendment to Law Number 16 of 2004 on the Attorney General’s Office of the Republic of Indonesia (State Gazette of the Republic of Indonesia of 2021 Number 298, Supplement to the State Gazette of the Republic of Indonesia Number 6755). https://www.dpr.go.id/dokumen/jdih/undang-undang/detail/1788
Law of the Republic of Indonesia Number 1 of 2023 on the Penal Code (State Gazette of the Republic of Indonesia of 2023 Number 1, Supplement to the State Gazette of the Republic of Indonesia Number 6842). https://www.dpr.go.id/dokumen/jdih/undang-undang/detail/1818
Law of the Republic of Indonesia Number 20 of 2025 on the Criminal Procedure Code (State Gazette of the Republic of Indonesia of 2025 Number 188, Supplement to the State Gazette of the Republic of Indonesia Number 7149). https://peraturan.go.id/id/uu-no-20-tahun-2025
Lestari, R. A., Rivanie, S. S., & Soewondo, S. S. (2023). Implementation of Restorative Justice for Narcotic Abusers: A Case Study in the Takalar Public Attorney’s Office. SIGn Jurnal Hukum, 5(1), 207-220. https://doi.org/10.37276/sjh.v5i1.275
Listiyanto, A., Panggabean, M. L., & Siregar, R. A. (2025). Pidana Kerja Sosial dalam KUHP Baru: Tantangan dan Harapan Perwujudan Keadilan Restoratif di Indonesia. Jurnal Hukum Mimbar Justitia, 11(1), 231-250. Retrieved from https://jurnal.unsur.ac.id/index.php/jhmj/article/view/5461
Maulana, A. (2015). Konsep Pengakuan Bersalah Terdakwa Pada “Jalur Khusus” Menurut RUU KUHAP dan Perbandingannya dengan Praktek Plea Bargaining di Beberapa Negara. Jurnal Cita Hukum, 3(1), 39-66. https://doi.org/10.15408/jch.v2i1.1840
Maulana, A. (2017). Pengakuan Bersalah Terdakwa dalam Perkembangan Pembuktian Peradilan Pidana Indonesia. Varia Justicia, 13(2), 65-81. https://doi.org/10.31603/variajusticia.v13i2.1881
Oktaviana, D. (2025). Kedudukan dan Peran Hakim Tunggal dalam Konsep Pleas Without Bargains di Indonesia dan Tiongkok. Tanjungpura Law Journal, 9(2), 155-175. Retrieved from https://jurnal.untan.ac.id/index.php/tlj/article/view/93128
Padang, M. A., Siregar, B. J., & Rosmalinda, R. (2024). Keberpihakan Pemidanaan dalam Undang-Undang Nomor 1 Tahun 2023. Locus: Jurnal Konsep Ilmu Hukum, 4(2), 64-71. Retrieved from https://jurnal.locusmedia.id/index.php/jkih/article/view/348
Pratama, M. I. W. (2024). Penerapan Pasal 54 Ayat (1) KUHP oleh Hakim dalam Menjatuhkan Putusan Pemidanaan. Indonesian Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology (IJCLC), 5(3), 125-131. https://doi.org/10.18196/ijclc.v5i3.24083
Putri, M. I., Ufran, U., & Saipudin, L. (2024). Pengaturan Konsep Lembaga Plea Bargaining dalam Pembaharuan Kitab Undang-Undang Hukum Acara Pidana (KUHAP). Parhesia, 2(1), 23-34. Retrieved from https://journal.unram.ac.id/index.php/Parhesia/id/article/view/4035
Putro, W. D., & Moeliono, T. P. (2020). Pengantar: Apakah (Ada) Kebenaran Hukum di Era Post-Truth? In W. D. Putro & T. P. Moeliono (Eds.), Menemukan Kebenaran Hukum dalam Era Post-Truth (pp. 1-17). Sanabil.
Qamar, N., & Rezah, F. S. (2020). Metode Penelitian Hukum: Doktrinal dan Non-Doktrinal. CV. Social Politic Genius (SIGn). https://books.google.co.id/books?id=TAQHEAAAQBAJ
Ramadhan, M., & Ariyanti, D. O. (2023). Tujuan Pemidanaan dalam Kebijakan Pada Pembaharuan Hukum Pidana Indonesia. Jurnal Rechten: Riset Hukum dan Hak Asasi Manusia, 5(1), 1-6. https://doi.org/10.52005/rechten.v5i1.114
Rivanie, S. S., & Ashar, M. S. I. (2025). Reorientation of Indonesian Criminal Law Politics: Shifting Paradigm from Retributive to Restorative in Death Penalty Regulation. SIGn Jurnal Hukum, 7(2), 869-885. https://doi.org/10.37276/sjh.v7i2.544
Rivanie, S. S., Muchtar, S., Muin, A. M., Prasetya, A. M. D., & Rizky, A. (2022). Perkembangan Teori-Teori Tujuan Pemidanaan. Halu Oleo Law Review, 6(2), 176-188. https://doi.org/10.33561/holrev.v6i2.4
Sampara, S., & Husen, L. O. (2016). Metode Penelitian Hukum. Kretakupa Print.
Setyanegara, E. (2014). Kebebasan Hakim Memutus Perkara dalam Konteks Pancasila (Ditinjau dari Keadilan “Substantif”). Jurnal Hukum & Pembangunan, 44(4), 460-495. https://doi.org/10.21143/jhp.vol44.no4.31
Sirjon, L., Sulihin, L. O. M., & Purnama, Y. F. (2023). Perbandingan Mekanisme Pengakuan Bersalah Pada Jalur Khusus dalam RUU KUHAP dan Konsep Plea Bargaining Ditinjau dari Asas Non-Self Incrimination. Halu Oleo Law Review, 7(2), 224-235. https://doi.org/10.33561/holrev.v7i2.29
Sood, R., & Raval, D. T. (2024). A Global Perspective on Plea Bargaining: Comparative Analysis of India, Usa, Australia, Germany, and the UK. VBCL Law Review, 9(1), 206-217. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.5362151
Copyright (c) 2026 K. M. M. Gusti Prasetyo, Syarif Saddam Rivanie, Muhammad Said Karim, Birkah Latif
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
.jpg)
