Jurnal Kanun

Just another WordPress site

Archive for the ‘ Jurnal Kanun ’ Category

Keadilan Restoratif di bawahResolusi

Pertubuhan Bangsa-bangsa Bersatu: Hak Tertuduh dan

Hak Mangsa Jenayah

(Restorative Justice Under the United Nations Resolution: Rights of the Accused and the Victims Of Crimes)

Norjihan Ab. Aziz

norjihanabaziz@iium.edu.my

Zuraini Ab. Hamid

zurainihamid@iium.edu.my

Kulliyyah Undang-undang Ahmad Ibrahim,

Universiti Islam Antarabangsa Malaysia.

Abstrak

Artikel ini menganalisis definisi dan konsep keadilan restoratif, serta membandingkannya dengan keadilan retributif. Merujuk prinsip Basic Principles on the Use of Restorative Justice Programmes in Criminal Matters, artikel ini menganalisis kaedah keadilan restoratif yang melindungi hak pesalah dan hak mangsa jenayah, serta melihat kedudukan Akta Kanun Tatacara Jenayah 2012 sama ada melindungi hak pesalah dan hak mangsa jenayah atau tidak seperti pendekatan keadilan restoratif. Hasil kajian mendapati walaupun Malaysia tidak melaksanakan keadilan restoratif, namun terdapat elemen keadilan restoratif dalam akta tersebut yang menjaga hak pesalah dan hak mangsa. Prinsip keadilan restoratif yang digariskan oleh PBB boleh dijadikan rujukan oleh Malaysia sekiranya ingin melaksanakan keadilan restoratif bagi menambah baik sistem keadilan jenayah sedia ada.

Kata kunci: keadilan restoratif, hak tertuduh, hak mangsa, keadilan retributif, kes jenayah

Abstract

This study analyses the definition and the concept of restorative justice, and how restorative justice is different from retributive justice. Referring to the principles provided by the United Nations known as the ‘Basic Principles on the use of Restorative Justice Programmes in Criminal Matters’, this study analyses how restorative justice protects and balances the rights of offenders and the victims. This study was also conducted to examine the legal position in Malaysia, especially under the Criminal Procedure Code Act 2012 on restorative justice. This study also determines whether the law under the Malaysian Criminal Procedure Code Act is sufficient to protect and to balance the rights of offenders and the victims, as it is in restorative justice. The principles of restorative justice provided by the United Nations can be used as reference and as a benchmark for Malaysia to implement restorative justice in the criminal justice system.

Keywords: restorative justice, rights of the accused, rights of victims \

RUJUKAN

Akta Kanun Tatacara Jenayah (Pindaan) 2010 (Pindaan) 2012.

Baljit Singh Sidhu. (2011). Criminal litigation process. Selangor: Sweet & Maxwell Asia.

Bazemore, G., & Griffths, C. T. (2003). Conference, circles, boards and mediations: The ‘new wave’ of community justice decision making. In McLaughlin, E., Fergusson, R., Hughes, G., & Westmarland, L. (Eds). Restorative justice: critical issues. United Kingdom: SAGE Publications.

Bazemore, G., & Schiff, M. (2003). Juvenile justice reform and restorative justice: building theory and policy from practice. Portland: Willian Publishing.

Benjamin, C. (1999). Why is victim/offender mediation called restorative justice. Restoration for Victims of Crime Conference. Melbourne: Australian Institute of criminology in conjunction with Victims Referral and Assistance Service and Held in Melbourne.

Brown, H. J, & Marriott, A. L. (2002). ADR principles and practice. United Kingdom: Sweet & Maxwell.

Davies, M., Croall, H., & Tyrer, J. (2005). Criminal justice: An introduction to the criminal justice system in England and Wales. UK: Longman.

Dorine, C. K. (2007). Restorative justice in the United States: An introduction. U.S.: Prentice Hall.

Gavrielides, T. & Artinopoulou, V. (2014). Prolegomena: Restorative justice philosophy through a value-based methodology. Dalam Gavrielides, T. & Artinopoulou, V. (Eds.). Reconstructing restorative justice philosophy. England: Ashgate Publishing Ltd.

Jerin, R. A. & Moriaty, L. J. (2010). The victims of crime. USA: Prantice Hall.

Fook, L. C. & Che Audah Hassan. (2011). The process of criminal justice: Trial proceedings, sentencing and appeals. Selangor: Lexis Nexis Malaysia Sdn. Bhd.

Marriot, R. A. (2002). Confidentiality and victim-offender mediation. USA: Maklu.

Marshall, T. (1964). Criminal mediation in Great Britain 1980 – 1996. European Journal on Criminal Policy and Research, 4(4), 21 – 43.

Nicholl, C. G. (1999). Community policing, community justice, and restorative justice: Exploring the links for the delivery of a balanced approach to public safety. United States: U. S. Department of Justice, Office of Community Oriented Policing Services.

Price, M. (2001). Personalising crime: Mediation produces restorative justice for victims and offenders. Dispute Resolution Magazine.

Shenk, A. H. (2003). Victim-offender mediation: The road to repairing hate crime injustice. Dalam Perry, B. (Ed.), Hate and bias crime: A reader. New York: Routledge.

Spencer, D. & Brogan, M. (2006). Mediation law and practice. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Strang, H. (2002). Repair or revenge: Victims and restorative justice. New York: Clarendon Press.

Umbreit, M. & Armour, M. P. (2010). Restorative justice dialogue: An essential guide for research and practice. New York: Springer Publishing Company.

Umbriet, M. S., Coates, R. B., & Vos, B. (2001). Victim impact of meeting with young offenders: Two decades of victim offender mediation practice and research. Dalam Morris, A., Maxwell, G., & Maxwell, G. M. (Eds.). Restorative justice for juveniles: Conferencing, mediation and circles. United Stated of America: Hart Publishing.

Umbreit, M. S., Coates, R. B., & Vos, B. (2004). Victim offender mediation: Three decades of practice and research. Conflict Resolution Quarterly, 22, 280 – 281.

Yeo, S., Morgan, N., & Cheong, C. W. (2012). Criminal law in Malaysia and Singapore. Singapore: Lexis Nexis Sdn. Bhd.

(Teks Penuh)