Tinjauan Yuridis Pemidanaan terhadap Pelaku Pengulangan Tindak Pidana Yang Diputus Nihil
Keywords:
Nihil Verdict, Ne Bis in Idem, Samenloop, Concurrence of Criminal Acts, Sentencing System.Abstract
This research deeply examines the imposition of nihil verdicts in criminal cases involving similar offenses tried separately, and analyzes its distinction from the concept of ne bis in idem. The study focuses on the legal basis, judicial considerations, and implications of both concepts for Indonesia's criminal sentencing system. We employed a normative legal research method, utilizing a statute approach to comprehensively review relevant regulations, particularly Kraksaan District Court Decision Number 100/Pid.B/2022/PN Krs. We also used a conceptual approach to understand the prevailing legal doctrines pertinent to the decision. Our findings conclude that Dimas Kanjeng's criminal cases fall under the category of samenloop (concurrence of offenses). The nihil verdict rendered (for instance, in Case Number 2471/Pid.B/2019/PN Sby) was based on Articles 65 and 66 of the Indonesian Criminal Code (KUHP). This was due to the total accumulated sentence of 21 years from previous cases, which had reached the maximum legal limit permitted by the limited cumulation system. Although the fraud offenses used the same legal basis (Article 378 KUHP) and involved a similar subject, these cases did not violate the principle of ne bis in idem because they involved different victims and/or series of events, making separate trials permissible. The nihil verdict affirms the defendant's guilt, but no additional punishment could be imposed as the cumulative limit had been reached. Therefore, we recommend that the government enhance public legal education regarding nihil verdicts, explaining that they represent a finding of guilt based on human rights protection against excessive punishment. Additionally, prosecutors should strive to consolidate samenloop cases into a single indictment, in accordance with Article 65 KUHP, to maintain consistency in Indonesia's sentencing system, which prohibits total penalties from exceeding the heaviest sentence plus one-third.
Downloads
References
Harahap, M. I. R., & Ramadhani, W. (2022). Kelebihan Kapasitas Lembaga Pemasyarakatan Sebagai Faktor Kriminogen terhadap Pengulangan Tindak Pidana oleh Warga Binaan. Indonesian Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology (IJCLC), 3(1), 12–27. https://doi.org/10.18196/ijclc.v3i1.12728
Hendriyadi, N. S. R., & Zakaria, C. a. F. (2025). Restorative Justice terhadap Pelaku Pengulangan Tindak Pidana Perundungan Dikaitkan dengan Tujuan Pemidanaan. Bandung Conference Series Law Studies, 5(1), 53–60. https://doi.org/10.29313/bcsls.v5i1.15904
Hidayatullah, S. S., & Maskur, M. A. (2025). Pertanggungjawaban Pidana terhadap Pelaku Tindak Pidana Terorisme yang Berkualifikasi Residivis di Indonesia (Studi Komparasi Negara Armenia). Amnesti Jurnal Hukum, 7(1), 15–32. https://doi.org/10.37729/amnesti.v7i1.6169
Kusumastuti, N. B., Alhadi, N. M. N., Surahman, N., & Elviandri, N. (2025). Model Penegakan Hukum Pidana Terhadap Narapidana Seumur Hidup Atas Pengulangan Tindak Pidana (Repetitio Delicti) Narkotika di Lapas. Jurnal Sosial Humaniora Dan Pendidikan, 4(3), 353–370. https://doi.org/10.55606/inovasi.v4i3.4847
Nisa, A. N. A. (2023). Peran lapas dalam membina wargabinaan sebagai upaya pencegahan pengulangan tindak pidana. Mutiara Jurnal Ilmiah Multidisiplin Indonesia, 1(1), 117–125. https://doi.org/10.61404/jimi.v1i1.22
Paramida, C., & Untan, J. M. S. H. (2017). Model Pembinaan Klien Narkoba dalam Rangka Pencegahan Pengulangan Tindak Pidana Narkotika. Jurnal Nestor Magister Hukum, 4(4), 210016. https://www.neliti.com/publications/210016/model-pembinaan-klien-narkoba-dalam-rangka-pencegahan-pengulangan-tindak-pidana
Priyadi, R., & Fitriasih, S. (2023). Pemidanaan terhadap pelaku pengulangan tindak pidana kekerasan dalam rumah tangga. SALAM Jurnal Sosial Dan Budaya Syar I, 10(3), 699–712. https://doi.org/10.15408/sjsbs.v10i3.31810
Purba, D. P. (2022). Pelaksanaan deradikalisasi oleh Badan Nasional Penanggulangan Terorisme dalam Pencegahan Pengulangan Tindak Pidana Terorisme. JISIP (Jurnal Ilmu Sosial Dan Pendidikan), 6(3). https://doi.org/10.58258/jisip.v6i3.3318
Putra, M. H. (2016). Sanksi Pidana Terhadap Anak Yang Melakukan Pengulangan Tindak Pidana (Residive). Jurnal IUS Kajian Hukum Dan Keadilan, 4(2). https://doi.org/10.12345/ius.v4i2.344
Setyawan, N. V. P. (2023). Makna Frasa “Pengulangan Tindak Pidana” dalam Regulasi Penyelesaian Perkara Anak dengan Keadilan Restoratif. IJOLARES Indonesian Journal of Law Research, 1(2), 28–31. https://doi.org/10.60153/ijolares.v1i2.19
Sianturi, R. F. (2022). Pelaksanaan pembinaan narapidana menurut Undang Undang Nomor 12 Tahun 1995 tentang Pemasyarakatan untuk Mencegah Pengulangan Tindak Pidana (Studi di Lembaga Pemasyarakatan Kelas II A Pematang Siantar). Jurnal Hukum Kaidah Media Komunikasi Dan Informasi Hukum Dan Masyarakat, 22(1), 82–106. https://doi.org/10.30743/jhk.v22i1.6037
Sunariyah, S., Warka, M., & Zeinudin, M. (2025). Peran Pembimbing Kemasyarakatan Dalam Menurunkan Angka Residivis Di Kabupaten Pamekasan. Indonesia Journal of Business Law, 4(1), 122–130. https://doi.org/10.47709/ijbl.v4i1.5627
Sutanti, R. D. (2017). Kebijakan Aplikatif Pemberatan Pidana Bagi Pelaku Pengulangan Tindak Pidana. Jurnal Pengabdian Hukum Indonesia (Indonesian Journal of Legal Community Engagement) JPHI, 2(1), 40–53. https://doi.org/10.15294/ijcls.v2i1.10814
Triwati, A., & Kridasaksana, D. (2021). Pijakan Perlunya Diversi Bagi Anak Dalam Pengulangan Tindak Pidana. JURNAL USM LAW REVIEW, 4(2), 828. https://doi.org/10.26623/julr.v4i2.3787
Umbara, I. T., Renggong, R., & Hamid, A. H. (2021). Peran Pembimbing Kemasyarakatan Sebagai Penegak Hukum Dalam Pencegahan Pengulangan Tindak Pidana Pada Balai Pemasyarakatan Kelas 1 Makassar. Indonesian Journal of Legality of Law, 2(2), 126–130. https://doi.org/10.35965/ijlf.v2i2.561
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 MLJ Merdeka Law Journal
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish in this journal agree to the following terms: MLJ Merdeka Law Journal is licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International. Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0) is applied when mandated by research funders, such as those who have signed. Open Access articles in MLJ Merdeka Law Journal are published under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) license. The copyright of the received article shall be assigned to the journal as the publisher of the journal. The intended copyright includes the right to publish the article in various forms (including reprints). The journal maintains the publishing rights to the published articles. Authors must agree to the copyright transfer agreement by checking the Copyright Notice column at the initial stage when submitting the article.
