Explore publications.

Indonesia recognizes the grounds of pardon in criminal law as stipulated in Article 44 of the Criminal Code (KUHP). One of the conditions that may be subjected to grounds of pardon is when the perpetrator of a criminal act is a person with a mental disorder, including schizophrenia. The consequence of this situation is that the perpetrator of a criminal act must be declared irresponsible for his actions and released from all criminal charges. However, in practice, the panel of judges would find the defendant with schizophrenia remain guilty since the judge would disregard the medical records or statements from psychiatric experts as evidence at trial. This article analyzes 2 Supreme Court Decisions, namely Supreme Court Decision No. 46 PK/Pid.Sus/2010 and Decision No. 94-K/PM.II-09/AD/V/2016. This research uses a normative juridical method. This research discusses the implementation of criminal sentences for persons with schizophrenia by confronting between field practices that remain sentencing persons with schizophrenia. Legal protections that able to be carried out by the state include terminating the prosecution, utilizing psychiatrists' statements as the basis for decisions, and deciding on defendants with acquittal decisions which in practice are not often found. This research concludes that legal protection for people with schizophrenia in Indonesia stays incongruent with the principles of criminal law and violates the principle of protecting the rights of the defendant. Law enforcement officials are remaining disregarding Article 44 of the Criminal Code by continuing to sentence, even executing people with schizophrenia who commit criminal acts even though there is a statement from a psychiatrist as valid evidence.

Narcotics crime in society (especially in Indonesia) shows an increasing trend both quantitatively and qualitatively with widespread victims, especially among children, adolescents, and the younger generation in general. Based on this, the government must increase efforts to prevent and eradicate narcotics crimes by any means, whether reforming the Narcotics Law, imposing strict sanctions and so on. The purpose of this research is to find out how the legal ratio of the Special Minimum Limit Regulation in the Law on Narcotics. This research is normative legal research with a conceptual approach and a philosophical approach. The legal materials used are primary and secondary with the technique of analyzing legal materials using the interpretation method. The results of the study indicate that the Ratio legis regulation specific minimum criminal provisions in the three laws studied, namely: the Narcotics Law and the Supreme Court Circular Number 03 of 2015, is intended to prevent disparities in the sentencing of crimes by judges. The regulation of types of criminal sanctions in legislation is one of the functions of the State to protect legal interests, in the form of life, property and dignity. The regulation of criminal sanctions is one of the criminal policy systems that can be seen from several aspects, namely the criminal system, namely: types of sanctions, alternative and cumulative forms of sanctions and their duration, namely the maximum-minimum of the punishment threatened.