The Crisis Of Judgment Execution In Indonesia Through The Phenomenon Of Delay In Executing Decisions That Have Fixed Legal Force

Abstract

Enforcing final and binding decisions should be the absolute obligation of the Indonesian Prosecutor's Office (Article 270 of the Criminal Procedure Code, the Prosecutor's Office Law), but in this case, the slow execution has created a crisis of substantive justice. Execution of a criminal decision is the final stage in the criminal justice process in Indonesia and a concrete indicator of the rule of law. Under Article 212 of the Criminal Procedure Code, upon receiving a copy of a final and binding decision, the public prosecutor is obligated to immediately execute the sentence against the convict. Meanwhile, Article 257 of the Criminal Procedure Code mandates that the court clerk must promptly send a copy of the decision to the public prosecutor. Delays or failure to comply with these statutory mandates can result in administrative and even criminal violations, as stipulated in Article 415 of the Criminal Procedure Code, which stipulates sanctions for officials who intentionally fail to fulfill their obligation to execute or summon convicts.