Social Science and Human Research Bulletin

The application of restorative justice in the discontinuation of criminal prosecutions is one of the criminal justice system reform policies aimed at achieving a more just, humane, and restoration-oriented resolution of cases. However, the implementation of this policy still faces various obstacles that could potentially affect its effectiveness. This study aims to analyze the implementation of restorative justice in the discontinuation of prosecutions for general criminal cases at the District Attorney’s Office, assess the effectiveness of its application, and identify the obstacles encountered in its implementation. The study employs an empirical legal method with a descriptive-analytical approach. Primary data were obtained through interviews with prosecutors and relevant parties, while secondary data were obtained from laws and regulations, case documents, books, and scientific journals. The data were analyzed qualitatively using George C. Edward III’s Policy Implementation Theory and Soerjono Soekanto’s Theory of Legal Effectiveness as analytical frameworks. The results of the study indicate that the implementation of restorative justice in the discontinuation of prosecution is, in principle, consistent with Law No. 11 of 2021 on the Attorney General’s Office of the Republic of Indonesia and Regulation of the Attorney General’s Office of the Republic of Indonesia No. 15 of 2020 on the Discontinuation of Prosecution Based on Restorative Justice. The effectiveness of its implementation is considered fairly effective, but not yet optimal, as it is still influenced by the quality of policy communication, the competence of law enforcement officials, the availability of supporting resources, and the public’s level of legal awareness. Implementation challenges include differing interpretations of the criteria for applying restorative justice, limited capacity of prosecutors to act as mediators, suboptimal coordination among law enforcement agencies, and low public understanding of case resolution through a restorative approach. Therefore, it is necessary to strengthen regulations, enhance human resource capacity, harmonize policies across institutions, and conduct ongoing public outreach to improve the effectiveness of restorative justice implementation within Indonesia’s criminal prosecution system

restorative justice, discontinuation of prosecution, Prosecutor's Office, legal effectiveness, policy implementation.

1. Braithwaite, J. (2002).Restorative justice and responsive regulation. Oxford University Press.
2. Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2023). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (6thed.). SAGE Publications.
3. Edward III, G. C. (1980).Implementing publicpolicy. Congressional Quarterly Press.
4. Hamzah, A. (2017). Penegakan hukum terhadap tindak pidana bermotif ringan dengan restorative justice. Jala Permata Aksara.
5. Indonesia. (1945). Undang-Undang DasarNegara Republik Indonesia Tahun 1945.
6. Indonesia. (1981). Undang-Undang Nomor 8 Tahun 1981 tentangHukum Acara Pidana.
7. Indonesia. (1999). Undang-Undang Nomor 39 Tahun 1999 tentangHak Asasi Manusia.
8. Indonesia. (2021). Undang-Undang Nomor 11 Tahun2021 tentang Perubahan atas Undang-Undang Nomor 16 Tahun 2004 tentang Kejaksaan Republik Indonesia.
9. Indonesia. (2023). Undang-Undang Nomor 1 Tahun 2023 tentangKitab Undang-Undang Hukum Pidana.
10. Isfarin, N. N., & Saputra, I. (2024). Menakarpertimbangan jaksa penuntutumum pada penghentian penuntutan perkara melalui pendekatan restorative justice. The Prosecutor Law Review, 2(2).
11. Kejaksaan Republik Indonesia. (2020). Peraturan Kejaksaan Republik Indonesia Nomor 15 Tahun 2020 tentang Penghentian Penuntutan Berdasarkan Keadilan Restoratif.
12. Kepolisian Negara Republik Indonesia. (2021). Peraturan Kepolisian Negara RepublikIndonesia Nomor 8 Tahun 2021 tentang Penanganan Tindak Pidana Berdasarkan Keadilan Restoratif.
13. Kristanto, A. (2022). KajianPeraturan Jaksa Agung Nomor 15 Tahun 2020 tentang penghentian penuntutan berdasarkan keadilan restoratif. Lex Renaissance, 7(1), 180–193.
14. Mahkamah Agung Republik Indonesia. (2024). Peraturan Mahkamah Agung Nomor 1 Tahun 2024 tentang Pedoman Mengadili Perkara Pidana Berdasarkan Keadilan Restoratif.
15. Marshall, T. (1999). Restorative justice: An overview. Home Office Research Development and Statistics Directorate.
16. Marzuki, P. M. (2021).Penelitian hukum (Edisi Revisi).Kencana.
17. Moleong, L. J. (2021).Metodologi penelitian kualitatif (Edisi Revisi). PT RemajaRosdakarya.
18. Rahardjo, S. (2009). Penegakan hukum: Suatu tinjauansosiologis. Genta Publishing.
19. Savira, R. D., & Sembiring, T. (2024). Penerapan restorative justice berdasarkan Peraturan Kejaksaan Nomor 15 Tahun 2020 tentang penghentian penuntutan berdasarkan keadilan restoratif. Journal of International Multidisciplinary Research, 2(1), 213–218.
20. Soekanto, S. (2019). Faktor-faktor yang memengaruhi penegakanhukum. Rajawali Pers.
21. Soekanto, S., & Mamudji,S. (2020). Penelitian hukum normatif: Suatutinjauan singkat. Rajawali Pers.
22. Syarif. (2024).Analisis Peraturan KejaksaanNomor 15 Tahun 2020 tentangpenghentian penuntutan berdasarkan keadilan restoratif. Dinamika Jurnal Hukum.
23. United NationsOffice on Drugs and Crime.(2020). Handbook on restorative justice programmes (2nded.). United Nations.
24. Waluyo, B. (2022). Penelitian hukum dalam praktik. Sinar Grafika.
25. Zehr, H. (2015). The littlebook of restorative justice (Reviseded.). Good Books.