Analysis of Law Enforcement of the Criminal Act of Theft with Aggrevabilitation Based on Justice Values (Case Study: Decision Number 104/Pid.B/2025/PN Sbw)

Abstract

The Criminal Code (KUHP) classifies theft ranging from ordinary theft to aggravated theft, each carrying heavier criminal sanctions. In practice, as reflected in Decision No. 104/Pid.B/2025/PN Sbw, law enforcement often encounters evidentiary challenges, while factors such as poverty and weak supervision contribute to the increasing prevalence of theft. These conditions require proportional law enforcement to maintain public order. The purpose of this research is to identify and analyze the implementation of law enforcement in cases of aggravated theft, as well as to examine the obstacles encountered in enforcing the law against aggravated theft and the solutions based on principles of justice. The methodological approach used in this thesis is a sociological juridical research method. The theoretical framework includes law enforcement theory and theories of justice. The results of this research show that: (1) The implementation of law enforcement in the aggravated theft case involving SYK in Sumbawa demonstrates that all stages of the criminal justice system have been carried out in accordance with applicable regulations, starting from the receipt of the report, investigation and inquiry, prosecution, and ending with the court's sentence based on the fulfillment of the elements under Article 363 paragraph (1) points 3 and 5 of the KUHP. The Sumbawa Police acted efficiently in conducting the crime scene investigation, collecting evidence, examining witnesses, and establishing the suspect. The Public Prosecutor examined the case file, drafted the indictment, attempted restorative justice and proceeded with prosecution. The Panel of Judges evaluated the evidence, considered aggravating and mitigating factors, and imposed a prison sentence of 3 years and 6 months, deemed proportionate. (2) Law enforcement regarding aggravated theft faces significant internal and external challenges. Internally, limitations in human resources, infrastructure, and the narrow scope for applying restorative justice cause law enforcement to lean more toward retributive rather than restorative approaches. Externally, low legal awareness, poor socio-economic conditions, unemployment, and poverty make communities vulnerable as both perpetrators and victims. Proposed solutions include strengthening human resources and facilities for law enforcement agencies, reformulating restorative justice policies, increasing legal education and awareness, and establishing policies that address the root causes of poverty and unemployment.