Analysis of the Implementation of Restorative Justice in the Settlement of Minor Assault Cases Based on Prosecutor's Regulation Number 15 of 2020

Abstract

The discontinuation of prosecution becomes even more apparent when associated with cases of minor assault. This type of case often arises from spontaneous quarrels, family relationships, neighbors, or social disputes that can actually be resolved through peace. The purpose of this study is to analyze the regulatory construction of the application of restorative justice in discontinuing prosecutions of minor assault cases; the weaknesses of the application of restorative justice in discontinuing prosecutions of minor assault cases; the application of restorative justice in discontinuing prosecutions of minor assault cases based on legal certainty. The type of research used in this thesis is empirical legal research. Empirical legal research is a legal research method that attempts to examine law in a concrete sense, or in other words, to observe and examine how law operates in society, using a qualitative research approach. The application of restorative justice in terminating prosecutions for minor assault cases demonstrates a shift in Indonesia's criminal justice system, shifting from a retaliatory orientation to a restorative approach that remains grounded in the principles of the rule of law, legal certainty, expediency, and justice. Normatively, the regulatory framework rests on Law Number 11 of 2021 concerning the Prosecutor's Office, Regulation of the Prosecutor's Office of the Republic of Indonesia Number 15 of 2020, Law Number 1 of 2023 concerning the Criminal Code, and Law Number 20 of 2025 concerning the Criminal Procedure Code, which collectively provide the basis for authority, technical guidelines, classification of minor assault offenses, and procedural legitimacy for restorative-based prosecution terminations. However, its implementation still faces weaknesses in legal substance, legal structure, and legal culture, such as unsynchronized regulations, unclear parameters for victim recovery and protection, multi-layered institutional procedures, unequal distribution of recovery facilities and services, and the persistence of a punitive paradigm within society and the authorities. From the perspective of legal certainty theory, this mechanism can only be deemed appropriate if implemented based on clear rules, firm authority, written procedures, voluntary agreements, and concrete judicial oversight. Therefore, the termination of prosecutions for minor assaults through restorative justice will only truly reflect justice and legal certainty if supported by regulatory harmonization, institutional strengthening, protection of victims' rights, and a legal culture that places recovery and accountability at the heart of case resolution.