Implementation of Criminal Penalty Instead of Fines About Penal Purpose For Narcotics Prisoners (Case Study in Class I Penitentiary Medan)

Law And Justice
(Leave this header blank) Vol. xx, No. x, xxx, pp.xxx-xxx

e-ISSN : 2549-8282
Website: http:// http://journals.ums.ac.id/index.php/laj
Implementation of Criminal Penalty instead of Fines about Penal

Purpose for Narcotics Prisoners (Case Study in Class I
Penitentiary Medan)
Alvin Dianuddin Pratama
Correctioanl Polytechnic
vindpr@gmail.com
ABSTRACT
This research focuses on the factors that encourage prisoners of

narcotics cases in Medan Class I Penitentiary, which in their decision
are added with fines, preferring to undergo imprisonment instead of
fines, as well as the effectiveness of penal provisions instead of fines in
relation to the purpose of punishment. The research method used is a
qualitative approach to the type of case study research. Based on the
results of research conducted, it is known that when convicts of
narcotics cases in Penitentiaries which in their verdict coupled with
criminal fines are faced with the choice between paying a fine and
serving a substitute prison, 95.1% of prisoners who become research
informants choose to undergo a substitute prison on the grounds of: 1)
economic conditions that can’t afford, 2) the lack of willingness to pay
fines based on rational calculations. It is known that the provision of
imprisonment instead of fines is less effective when viewed from the
objective of punishment, because it is not able to achieve what is the
goal of criminal fines and criminal punishment in general, namely
compensation for conflicts caused, restoring balance, and bringing a
sense of peace in society. The author provides suggestions that can be
an alternative solution to the existing problems, namely: 1) the judge
must address each narcotics case more objectively and consider
everything from the side of the perpetrator's life, so that the decision
handed down also provides an opportunity for the offender to undergo
a criminal period and be able to pay fines by the provisions in the
judge's ruling, 2) in determining the ruling on the perpetrators of
criminal acts of narcotics cases, the judge should consider the
economic situation and the cooperative level of the perpetrators
during the trial. In this case the role of the Penitentiary is urgently
needed about making reports on the lives of perpetrators and the
motivations of perpetrators reported in the Community Research
Report, 3) that Law No.35 of 2009 needs to be reviewed, particularly
in the provision of fines regulated in the law.
1
Manuscript Template...(Author’s Name & Author’s Name)
Keywords: Criminal Penalty, Criminal Penalty instead of Penalty,

Rational Calculation, Criminal Purpose.
INTRODUCTION
Background
The Unitary State of the Republic of Indonesia is a state of law that upholds law
enforcement in the lives of its people. Law as one aspect of human life itself grows and
develops along with the development of society. The rate of development of society supported
by modern science and technology will require the efforts of legal reform so that the
applicable legal provisions can always meet the needs of the community. Various regulations
are made in the context of law enforcement in Indonesia and as an effort by the state to create
a safe and orderly life for its people.
One type of law is criminal law. An inseparable part of criminal law is criminal and
criminal matters. Criminal nature is suffering. Criminal sentences for those who are
considered guilty are the nature of suffering that must be endured, however, criminal
sanctions are not solely intended to provide a sense of suffering. Criminalization is a process.
Before the process runs, the role of judges is very important. Judges concretize criminal
sanctions contained in regulation by imposing penalties for the defendant in certain cases.
In the Criminal Code, the types of crimes that are threatened with perpetrators of
crime are regulated in article 10 of the Criminal Code, namely the main penalties consisting
of capital punishment, imprisonment, confinement, fines, and additional penalties consists of
revocation of certain rights, seizure of certain items and announcement of the judge's
decision. The purpose of the crime of deprivation of liberty imposed is that with that criminal
coaching can be carried out in such a way that after the convict is finished serving his
sentence is expected to be a better person than before. The training itself is carried out in a
penitentiary against people who have been sentenced to imprisonment and are required to
undergo a sentence in a prison.
So, since a defendant is sentenced by a Judge with a prison sentence or a crime of
missing freedom of movement, the defendant becomes a convict. As a place of serving a
sentence of imprisonment, the convict is placed in a Penal Institution and convicted prisoners
and will experience the loss of independence or limitations in moving space in meeting their
2
Law And Justice
e-ISSN : 2549-8282
needs because of the existence of regulated lifestyle rules, which are strictly applied to the
convicted and felt by the convict as suffering or in pain.
Penitentiary system as stipulated in Law No.12 of 1995 concerning Penitentiary is an
arrangement regarding the direction and boundaries and ways of fostering Penitentiary
Guides based on Pancasila which is carried out in an integrated manner between the
coaches, who are fostered, and the community to improve the quality of Correctional
Guidance Citizens so that realize their mistakes, improve themselves and not repeat acts that
violate the law again so that they can be accepted again by the community and can play an
active role in the development and can live properly as good and responsible citizens both for
themselves and the community.
The penitentiary system was initiated by Saharjo at the State Palace in the
inauguration and acceptance of the Honoris Causa Doctorate, in law given by the University
of Indonesia. As Dr. Shaharjo said that the purpose of imprisonment is "Besides causing pain
to the convicted person because of the loss of freedom of movement, guiding the convicted
person to repent, educate them to be useful members of the Indonesian social community"
(Saharjo 1963 p. 21).
In addition to imprisonment as a basis for the responsibility of correctional officers,
certain criminal offenses also provide additional penalties in the form of fines that must be
paid by the perpetrators of criminal acts. However, in the Criminal Code in certain articles
namely regarding violations or crimes threatened with criminal fines in practice the
application is always accompanied by the threat of criminal imprisonment in place of fines.
This means that if the criminal fine is handed down to the defendant, then it is not necessarily
forced on him to pay the fine.
In addition to imprisonment, it also regulates the imposition of fines as an alternative
to the usurpation of liberty that can be used and its existence contained in article 10 of the
Criminal Code which can be maximized both as a substitute for a short prison sentence and
also as a stand-alone criminal, because it is considered not to cause stigmatization and
imprisonment and economically the state gets input in the form of money or at least saves
social costs compared to the type of imprisonment. When criminal fines stand alone it will
have several positive impacts, both for the state and for the perpetrators of crimes that are
sentenced to a fines. The impact on the state is the reduction in budget expenditures for the
3
necessities of life of people who have been sentenced to fines, achieving the deterrent effect
that is felt by these people due to deficiencies in material matters, the restoration of a
disturbed balance due to criminal acts committed, and there is input to the state through fines
paid. Whereas criminals who are sentenced to fines will get some positive effects because they
do not have to undergo a criminal period in prison and avoid the public stigma when
someone is sentenced to prison.
One of the crimes in which the ruling is accompanied by criminal fines also and
accompanied by criminal provisions in place of fines is a case of narcotics abuse. The
number of detainees and prisoners in Indonesia based on statistical data from the Gateway
System Directorate General of Correctional Short Message Service dated May 31, 2012 was
149,350 prisoners and prisoners, while the number of convicted drug cases dated May 31,
2012 was 51,519 people. In Law Number 35 Year 2009 concerning Narcotics it is regulated
that every perpetrator of narcotics abuse can be subject to criminal sanctions. However, the
law stipulates that the fines imposed can be replaced with imprisonment. These provisions
differ from the provisions contained in the Criminal Code, in which fines are replaced with
substitute confinement, even though in practice, in this case in Medan Class I Penitentiary,
the mechanism for implementing penalties instead of fines is still the same as those in the
Criminal Code, where the subsider (substitute) for the specified fines are served in full by the
Prisoners Prisoners after undergoing the principal crime by the judge's decision.
The law has regulated criminal penalties, namely articles 111 to article 129, where
the amount of the fines mentioned ranges from 400 million to 10 billion rupiahs and if the fine
is not paid then it will be replaced with imprisonment. the duration varies in practice, which
is between 1 month, 2 months, 3 months, 4 months, 6 months and there are up to 2 years by
court decisions. The purpose of the amount of the fine is to impose sanctions in the hope that
the eradication of narcotics crime will be effective and achieve maximum results. The
imposition of criminal fines also aims to make the perpetrators of criminal acts generally
suffer from suffering in the form of misery because of the material in question they feel
lacking. Also, the fines imposed also aim to restore the disturbed balance due to narcotics
crimes committed by the perpetrators, where the misuse of narcotics has become one of the
world's ideals to be fought together because it damages the nation's next generation and has
many negative impacts on the future every country.
4
Law And Justice
e-ISSN : 2549-8282
Law Number 35 Year 2009 concerning Narcotics regulates the imposition of criminal
sanctions for narcotics abuse, both in criminal form, and fines imposed. However, when
viewed from the provision of imprisonment as a substitute for a fine if the fine handed down is
not paid, it will place the prisoner on choice; pay a fine or serve a sentence of imprisonment
with the length of the sentence according to the law. When inmates undergo a criminal period
and pay the fines imposed, then it can be said that the criminal fines target in the law has
been achieved, namely as a weight of criminal sanctions or a giver of suffering in the form of
wealth reduction, also to restore balance and resolve conflicts caused by criminal acts.
However, it will be ineffective and not on target, when inmates prefer to serve substitute
imprisonment rather than pay a fine according to the judge's decision.
Correctional Institutions as an integral part of the integrated criminal justice system
in Indonesia feel the direct impact of the provisions of prison substitute fines in imposing
these penalties. In addition to carrying out the guiding process, the Penitentiary also treats
prisoners during their criminal period. When the prisoner must undergo imprisonment in lieu
of a fine which of course spends a longer time in the Correctional Institution as a
consequence of not paying the fine according to the court's decision, the longer the
Correctional Institution must carry out the care function of the prisoner. This also affects the
implementation of fostering activities for prisoners as the responsibility of Penitentiaries for
their prisoners, and also influences the amount of cost or budget needed by the Directorate
General of Corrections to be subsequently channeled to the Correctional Institution in
Indonesia in meeting the needs and infrastructure of prisoners undergoing prisoners'
infrastructure. substitute imprisonment, as a responsibility in achieving the objectives of the
Penitentiary System, namely in fostering lawbreakers in order to become human beings who
can live properly again in the midst of society, as before he committed a crime.
According to the author's research at Medan Class, I Penitentiary, as many as 95.1%
of convicts in narcotics cases who were informants of this study prefer to undergo
imprisonment instead of paying fines according to the judge's decision. Whereas inmates who
choose to pay a fine are only around 4.9%.
Starting from this thought, the writer tries to describe the effectiveness of the
provision of imprisonment as a substitute for fines on prisoners in Penitentiary viewed from
the purpose of punishment.
5
Formulation of The Problem

Based on the background above, then the problem can be formulated as follows:
1. What are the factors that encourage prisoners of narcotics cases who are imposed with
fines in addition to imprisonment for preferring to serve substitute imprisonment rather than
paying fines imposed in Class I Prison in Medan?
2. To what extent is the effectiveness of imprisonment in lieu of fines for convicted narcotics
cases against criminal purposes?
Purpose
Based on the background description and the formulation of the problems that have been
mentioned, the objectives of the research to be achieved are:
1. To find out and identify the factors that encourage inmates to prefer to undergo substitute
imprisonment rather than pay the fines imposed.
2. To find out the effectiveness of the provision of imprisonment as an alternative to criminal
fines for convicted narcotics cases in relation to criminal purposes.
RESEARCH METHOD
1. Approach Qualitative
2. Data Collection Method
a. Interview
b. Observation
c. Document
3. Data Analysis Techniques
In this study, researchers used qualitative data analysis techniques in which data from
interviews, observations, and documents to be analyzed were collected, and interpreted by
researchers descriptively according to the research objectives. Qualitative data analysis is:
6
Law And Justice
e-ISSN : 2549-8282
"Efforts are made by working with data, organizing data, breaking it down into manageable
units, synthesizing it, searching and finding patterns, discovering what is important and what
is learned, and deciding what can be told to others". (Bogdan and Biklen, 1982).
After the data is obtained the researcher analyzes qualitatively through three stages:
1. Data collection.
The first stage is the process of gathering data obtained from interviews with inmates
and employees as well as observations made directly to see the spaciousness and cross-check
the determination of the choice to pay a fine or undergo substitute imprisonment on narcotics
convicts.
2. Categorization of data collected.
After all data in the field is collected, it is then categorized based on the concepts
needed. This categorization process is carried out after all the required data has been
collected.
3. Analysis of the data that has been collected.
After all, data are categorized then analyzed using relevant frameworks to find a
pattern that can answer the research objectives, namely about the factors that encourage
prisoners prefer to undergo substitute imprisonment rather than pay a fine, and the
effectiveness of imprisonment in lieu of fines on narcotics convicts.
RESULTS & DISCUSSION

Choice of Prisoners of Narcotics Cases Against Fine Penal Decisions
The number of WBPs in Class I Penitentiary Medan when the authors conducted the
study was 2553 while the WBP with narcotics cases or as informants from the research
conducted were 1843 people, in which the research was devoted to 103 people to represent
the whole WBP with narcotics cases at the Penitentiary. Class I Medan.
The sampling of 103 people was based on the length of sentences handed down by the
judge to each WBP. As for the sample for research is the WBP narcotics case with a sentence
of imprisonment under 5 (five) years and accompanied by a fine as an additional criminal.
7
Through collaboration with the registration section, 103 prisoners' data were obtained for the
later research.
Table 1
Classification Based on Prisoners' Choices Against Penal Criminal Decisions
Amount
No. Choice Total
s
1. Paying Fines 5 5
Undergoing Criminal
2. 98 98
Substitution of Prison
Total 103 103
Based on the research carried out, the authors divide the choices taken by inmates in
resolving criminal fines imposed on narcotics cases committed.
1. Pay a fine
From 103 prisoners, there are 5 (five) people who choose to pay the fine according to
the court's decision. When asked by the authors about the underlying reasons they chose to
pay a fine, the answers obtained by the authors from the five informants are illustrated in the
form of the table below.
Table 2
Classification Based on Prisoners' Economic Conditions
Amount
No. Choice Total
s
1. Middle Economy 4 4
High Economy (Very

2. 1 1
Capable)
Total 5 5
8
Law And Justice
e-ISSN : 2549-8282
Of the five prisoners, 4 (four) of them chose to pay a fine in accordance with the
decision handed down by the court on the grounds of rational calculation related to the
amount of the fine compared to the length of the substitute prison. Against 3 (three) of the 4
(four) inmates were subjected to additional fines of Rp.2,000,000.00 (two million rupiahs),
where the provisions of the substitute imprisonment specified were 1 (one) month each for 2
(two) prisoners, and one other prisoner was sentenced to a substitute prison for 2 months.
Whereas an inmate gets an additional fine of Rp.3,000,000.00 (three million rupiahs) with the
provision of substitute imprisonment for 2 (two) months.
The four inmates answered the interview conducted by the author, that the reason they
chose to pay the fine was a rational calculation taken by each of them with the consideration
that paying the aforementioned amount of money would be more beneficial to them than if
they had to undergo the terms of imprisonment a substitute even though basically their
economic conditions are not from high economic circles. The desire to return to the family as
soon as possible is their main motivation for determining the choice to pay the fine.
Another prisoner with the initials (R) who chose to pay a fine was a prisoner who received an
additional fine of Rp.150,000,000.00 (one hundred fifty million rupiahs) with the provision of
substitute imprisonment for 1 (one) month. When the prisoner was asked by the author about
his reasons for choosing to pay the fine according to the judge's decision, he replied:
"Because my family really needs my existence to make a living. I will use the remaining
money I have to pay fines, and to open a business to meet the long-term needs of my children.
From the informant's answer, the writer draws the conclusion that the prisoner in
question prefers to pay a large enough fine because it is based on the desire to immediately
return to the family and at the same time still have enough money to pay the fine, so that the
prisoner does not overestimate the amount the fine he will pay, but rather prioritizes his sense
of responsibility in providing for his family despite having to start a business from scratch by
utilizing the remaining money he has after paying the fine.
2. Undergoing Substitution Prison Criminal
9
Of all prisoners who were informants of this study, 98 people stated their choice to
undergo a substitute prison as determined in the court's decision. Regarding the writer's
question at the time of the interview with the informant about their reasons for choosing to go
to jail instead of paying fines, the authors grouped their answers in the following table.
Table 3
Classification Based on Reasons Prisoners Choose Undergoing Prison
No. Choice Total Amounts
Economic
1. Conditions 70 70
can’t Afford
Rational
2. 28 28
Calculation
3. Etc - -
Total 98 98
From the table above it can be seen that of the 98 prisoners who chose to undergo a
substitute prison, 70 of them or around 71.4% were motivated by poor economic conditions,
which caused these prisoners to not be able to pay fines even though they wanted to finish
immediately his criminal period, just like other prisoners who choose to pay a fine. This can
be seen from in-depth interviews conducted by the author of one of the prisoners with the
initials MA who said: "Because I am old enough, and do not have a very large amount of
money like the fines imposed by the judge. That much money may not be able to be collected
in a short time. The money is better for my family's needs. I surrender if I have to spend
longer here (Lapas)." The inmate's answer had something in common with 69 others, namely
limited economic conditions and did not have as much money as the fines imposed on them.
Meanwhile, 28 other prisoners who chose to undergo substitute prison were based on
rational calculations they considered, namely the benefits they get if paying fines compared to
when they undergo the terms of substitute imprisonment as a consequence of unpaid fines.
10
Law And Justice
e-ISSN : 2549-8282
The thing that prisoners most consider is that although they can pay a fine as determined by a
judge in court, they prefer to undergo a substitute prison because it is not comparable to the
fines imposed with substitute imprisonment that must be served when the prisoner does not
pay the fine. Even if the prisoners pay fines and can get past their criminal sentences early,
they calculate that there is very little chance they will be able to earn as much as the fines
they pay at the same time as the specified substitute prison. Like the answer of an inmate with
the initials AB: "The calculation of the advantages and disadvantages are very not
comparable. If I pay, in 2 months I certainly cannot get that much money
(Rp.800,000,000.00). It's better if I just live for two months in prison (Lapas)."
Apart from prisoners as research informants, the author also conducted interviews
with several employees in Class I Prison Medan related to fines with provisions of substitute
imprisonment imposed on convicts of narcotics cases. In one of the interviews with the Head
of Medan Class I Penitentiary Division, who said: "Everyone has different thoughts from
others, and can also be the same as other people. In terms of paying fines, depending on
economic conditions or what he considers profitable for him. In my opinion, with a substitute
criminal fines that only in a matter of months, while fines that should be paid in the hundreds
of millions or even billions of rupiah, regardless of the person can afford to pay or not, will
think longer if you want to immediately return to the family by paying fines. In carrying out
our role as executors of the coaching program, we (officers) do not question this. We just
need to focus our attention on the program that we run so that after returning to the middle of
the community later, the WBP narcotics cases can live properly again, and break away from
the bondage of dependence or illicit drug business ties that have damaged this generation of
the nation."
A. Interpretation and Discussion

As stated in the explanation of the Criminal Code Bill, the purpose of the amount of
the fine is to provide suffering materially, as part of an effort to restore the disturbed balance
due to narcotics crimes committed by the perpetrators, where the abuse of narcotics has
become one of the ideals of the world to fought together because it damaged the nation's next
generation and caused many negative impacts for the future of each country.
11
In the imposition of fines in addition to imprisonment imposed on the perpetrators of

narcotics crimes, accompanied by the provision of imprisonment instead of fines which can
be a last resort for perpetrators who are unable or unable to pay fines in the amount of a
court decision.
Judges should not only consider criminal acts committed, but also take into account
the circumstances of the suspect, both in terms of whether the cooperatives are cooperative or
not in undergoing trial, as well as the economic or material conditions of the suspect, so that
the imposition of a criminal fine is not merely a manifestation of the application of the law
serve as the basis for a verdict, but also opens the opportunity for the achievement of the
penalty imposed itself. In this case, the Judge requires the role of the Penitentiary to research
the life of the suspect reported and given as consideration in court in the form of a
Community Research Report, so that the objective of imposing a fine in addition to the
imprisonment can be achieved, while on the other hand The fines can be paid by the convicted
person to resolve the sentence imposed on him by the specified criminal period, and can
immediately return to the community. Whereas the existence of imprisonment instead of a fine
itself does not necessarily exclude the imposition of the specified penalties, but only as an
alternative or consequence of not paying the fine.
However, from the findings of researchers in Medan Class I Penitentiary, out of 103
prisoners who received additional fines in addition to prison sentences representing 1843
prisoners of narcotics cases, there were 98 people or around 95.1% of prisoners who
preferred to undergo imprisonment instead of fines.
Through interviews conducted with the research informants, it can be seen that the
decision to undergo a replacement prison is motivated by poor economic conditions or can be
said to be a low economic level of 70 people or 71.4%, so they cannot pay fines the amount
decided by the Judge in court. The other 28 people chose to go to substitute prison based on
the rational calculations they considered, in which they assumed that by undergoing
substitute prison would be easier for them than if they paid a fine, although economically they
were able to pay a fine as determined by the Judge.
When it is associated with the concept of the goal of criminal fines which is to resolve
conflicts caused by criminal acts, restore balance, and bring a sense of peace in the
community, then the results obtained are quite different from what was intended for
imprisonment.
12
Law And Justice
e-ISSN : 2549-8282
The purpose of punishment is the direction or target to be achieved through various

criminal acts in Indonesia. In this case, the writer prioritizes one of several points which are
the aim of punishment, which is to resolve conflicts caused by criminal acts, restore balance,
and bring a sense of peace in the community, where these objectives also become a reference
for various criminal provisions stipulated in the regulations official.
However, given the fact obtained by the author, namely the number of prisoners who
chose to undergo a substitute prison reached 95.1%, seems to be very incompatible with what
is the goal of punishment in general. Whereas 5 (five) inmates who chose to pay a fine
showed different motivations among the prisoners themselves, who if only in terms of the
concept of a criminal purpose, the five prisoners had sufficient motivation in supporting the
achievement of the criminal objective.
1. Decisions are taken by convicts against fines imposed in terms of rational choice
Rational choice theory by James S, Coleman is an individual action that leads to a
goal and that goal (also action) is determined by value or choice. The rational choice theory
focuses on the actor where the actor is seen as a human who has a goal or has a meaning that
the actor has a goal and an action aimed at achieving that goal, the actor is also seen to have
choices or values and needs.
In the case of making a choice between paying a fine or serving a substitute prison,
prisoners are faced with a neutral position that frees them from any intervention in making
decisions.
Regarding the data obtained by the author at the time of research at Medan Class I
Penitentiary, it can be seen that the choice of paying a fine or serving a substitute prison
requires prisoners to think and consider as far as possible before making a decision.
Of the 5 (five) people who choose to pay a fine, 1 (one) person makes the decision to
pay a fine with economic conditions that are sufficiently capable and strongly supports the
prisoner to determine the choice that is considered the best and place the prisoner in a
favorable position. Whereas 4 (four) other people determine the choice of paying fines based
on the calculation they do that allows them to be in a position which is quite favorable
according to the calculation. Basically, they are not in a high economic condition, but
because they are driven by a strong desire to immediately return to the middle of the family,
13
they insist on paying the specified fines even though they have to use almost all of their wealth
to settle the criminal fines imposed.
In addition to the prisoners mentioned above, found data on the number of prisoners
who took the decision to undergo a substitute prison, with details of 70 people or around
71.4% was motivated by economic conditions that are not possible. While the other 28 people
(28.6%) were due to the rational calculations they applied.
Responding to the inability of 70 prisoners to pay fines due to the low economic
conditions, the authors argue that in rendering the verdict against them, the judge did not pay
attention to the economic conditions of the suspects when conducting trials in court. When
going to impose a criminal ruling, the judge should also take into account how the economic
situation of the suspect and how much motivation the defendant is responsible for his
mistakes through the trial conducted, before determining how much the fines will be imposed
on the defendants.
If the Judge is aware of the defendant's condition both in terms of the economy and
the cooperative level of the defendant in undergoing the trial, surely the amount of the fine
imposed will be in accordance with the level of the defendant's ability to pay the fine. In this
case, the Judge requires the role of the Penitentiary who has the authority to conduct
research on a person's life since he underwent the investigation process. The results of the
research will be contained in the form of a report which should be taken into consideration
for the Judge in deciding a criminal case. Thus the conviction for criminal acts, especially
narcotics cases can provide an opportunity for the convicted person to pay a fine and return
to the community after serving a prison sentence according to the verdict handed down.
A number of prisoners' answers during an unstructured interview motivated the writer
to analyze the answers of the informants carefully, referring to the concept of Rational Choice
theory which encourages the writer to examine the data obtained to be used as data that is
ready to be processed in writing this paper.
In carrying out rational calculations, the prisoners estimate what conditions they will
get after paying a fine and returning home sooner to the middle of the family compared to the
condition if they undergo a substitute prison. In the end, the decision taken by the prisoners
shows that the motivation of the prisoners in making choices is to work for the easiest
conditions for them, both economically and socially.
14
Law And Justice
e-ISSN : 2549-8282
2. Decisions made by convicts of the fines imposed in terms of the purpose of punishment
The draft 2012 Law (KUHP) in Article 54 paragraphs (1) and (2) states:
Criminal and Criminal Objectives are:
(1) Criminalization aims:
a. prevent criminal acts by upholding legal norms for the protection of the community;
b. popularize the convicted person by holding coaching so that he becomes a good
and useful person;
c. resolve conflicts caused by criminal acts, restore balance, and bring a sense of
peace in society; and
d. freeing guilt on the convicted person.
(2) Criminalization is not intended to narrate and demean human dignity
By paying attention to part c of the above criminal purpose, specifically in terms of
the settlement of criminal fines imposed on narcotics offenders, the authors argue that in the
integrated criminal justice system series in Indonesia, coordination of each law enforcement
agency is needed. Restoring balance in accordance with one of the objectives of criminal
justice requires a series of processes that run well and objectively in the integrated criminal
justice system. Referring to the findings of the author when collecting data in Medan Class I
Penitentiary, the author follows up on the data collected to be interpreted by referring to the
theoretical concepts used as guidelines by the authors.
The reality is that more prisoners choose to undergo jail in lieu of fines as a
consequence of not paying fines according to court decisions. Thus, when it is associated with
the criminal penalties goal, the choice determined by convicted narcotics cases is not leading
to the achievement of criminal penalties.
As can be seen from the results of interviews with 103 people convicted of narcotics
cases in Medan Class I Penitentiary, as many as 98 people or 95.1% chose to serve substitute
imprisonment. This is very contrary to the objectives to be achieved by making provisions
regarding criminal fines.
Judging from the concept of a restorative approach (restorative justice), the
imposition of criminal fines in addition to imprisonment against narcotics offenders aims to
provide an opportunity for offenders to resolve conflicts caused by crimes committed,
15
restoring balance and creating a sense of peace in society as before the crime was committed.
In addition, the settlement of the case through a restorative approach aims to compensate.
In this case, the author discusses the narcotics case which has damaged the nation's
generation and caused a tremendous negative impact on the future of a country. In addition,
the misuse of narcotics also affects other criminal acts such as theft, murder, immorality, and
so on. It can be said that narcotics crime not only causes problems for the perpetrators but
also causes problems for the lives of people around the perpetrators. The situation requires
an effective solution to overcome the problems arising from the abuse of narcotics. This aims
to immediately resolve the ongoing conflicts that have arisen in the community and prevent
the birth of new actors who are trapped in the bondage of narcotics.
Abuse and distribution of narcotics itself have become a problem that is an enemy of
the people, not only Indonesia but all countries in the world. Narcotics crime which is
categorized as extra-ordinary crime indicates that narcotics have become a big problem for
the world which is internationally fought by countries in the world together because the
narcotics distribution itself has reached the international level, namely circulation. between
countries.
Based on the above conditions, the authors argue that what must be achieved is not
just an effort to deter only the perpetrators, but how so that the situation in the community
can be recovered after the perpetrators received a sentence in the form of imprisonment with
additional fines as regulated in Law No.35 of 2009 about Narcotics.
Within the scope of criminal justice in Indonesia, the author re-emphasizes the role of
judges in passing decisions on the perpetrators of a narcotics crime. If in addition to the
imprisonment regulated, a fine has been regulated in addition to imprisonment, the Judge
must be able to consider all matters from the side of the perpetrator or the defendant before
making a fine verdict. Dropping a very large amount of fines on a perpetrator with low
economic conditions will only force the offender to spend more time in prison, due to the
provision of substitute imprisonment as an alternative when the specified fines cannot be
paid. Under these circumstances, what is the goal of punishment and the purpose of the
concept of a restorative approach cannot be achieved, because the imposition of a criminal
fine itself seems in vain. Whereas on the other hand, Lapas as a place to carry out guidance
for inmates will face increasingly greater challenges in achieving the goals of coaching for
prisoners while serving a criminal period, because by serving as a substitute prison, a
16
Law And Justice
e-ISSN : 2549-8282
prisoner, especially narcotics cases, will be increasingly long in the Lapas, and has become
the responsibility of Lapas officers in carrying out care and guidance for each prisoner.
Meanwhile, in terms of reducing prisoners 'serving time, the provision of
imprisonment in lieu of fines must be served by inmates, not included in the calculation of the
prisoners' serving period which is part of the administrative requirements that must be met
when a prisoner will seek a social reintegration process to return to the community. This
provision refers to the Director-General of Corrections Number PAS-132.OT.03.03 of 2010
concerning "Requirements and Procedures for the Implementation of Assimilation,
Conditional Release, Pre-Free Leave, and Conditional Leave and Granting Remission
Against Prisoned Criminals In addition to Principal Crimes as well as Additional Crimes for
Paying Replacement Money", where the regulation was made after the implementation of the
Central Session of the Correctional Observer Team (TPP) of the Central - Directorate
General of Corrections attended by representatives of the Indonesian Attorney General's
Office, the Republic of Indonesia National Police (POLRI), and the Corruption Eradication
Commission.
In the end, the fine that should have made money for the state as part of conflict
resolution and restoring the balance due to narcotics crime, would not be realized. On the
contrary, the state must issue a larger budget as a responsibility in providing food and health
services for prisoners while serving a crime, in this case, imprisonment in place of a fine.
Likewise with the concept of criminal objectives in general. By not showing any efforts
to achieve criminal goals in fines imposed on convicted narcotics cases, it can be said that the
provisions of the prison substitute for fines in Medan Class I Penitentiary, especially
prisoners of narcotics cases, in reality, do not lead to the achievement of the goal of
punishment itself. This is evidenced by the imposing of a large number of criminal fines for
perpetrators of narcotics cases, especially prisoners in Medan Class I Penitentiary. Where in
the UPT the data obtained show that the success rate achieved in imposing fines was only
around 4.9%, and can be said to be still very low. It can be proven that the goal of criminal
fines is not achieved because the perpetrators prefer to spend a longer time in prison, which
is around 95.1% so that the balance to be recovered cannot be achieved. Likewise, conflicts
caused by narcotics crimes with criminal penalties in addition to imprisonment cannot be
17
resolved properly, other than just forcing the offender to stay longer in prison due to the lack
of the perpetrator's ability to make amends through the payment of fines to the state
CONCLUSION
From the whole description above, the writer can conclude the following:
1. Factors that encourage prisoners of narcotics cases to prefer to undergo imprisonment
rather than pay fines in Class I Penitentiary Medan are:
a. Economic conditions that can not afford to prisoners as much as 71.4%
When a defendant is sentenced to a fine in addition to imprisonment, the decision by
the prisoner to choose to pay the fine or to serve substitute imprisonment is based on his
economic level. If the person has a low economy (underprivileged), there will be very little
opportunity to pay fines, although basically, the person has a great will and desire to pay the
fines.
b. The lack of willingness to pay fines based on rational calculations of inmates as
much as 28.6%
Whereas in making decisions related to payment of fines determined by the Judge, a
criminal performs a rational calculation, which is based on the desire to obtain more
favorable conditions for him. When the fines imposed are considered too large, while on the
other hand the provision of imprisonment in lieu of fines is considered to be more light for
him, will encourage the person to waive the obligation to pay the fines and be more likely to
be willing to spend longer periods of time in Corrections as a consequence of choice which is
determined.
2. Whereas the provision of imprisonment in lieu of fines is less effective when viewed from
the objective of punishment, in which the punishment aims to resolve conflicts caused by
criminal acts, restore balance, and bring a sense of peace in the community. The
imprisonment of the fine has its own purpose, namely as compensation, or resolving conflicts.
When a person who is sentenced to a criminal fine, in the end, prefers to undergo
imprisonment in lieu of a fine, then what is the purpose of the criminal fine and punishment,
in general, can be said to be unattainable.
REFERENCES
18
Law And Justice
e-ISSN : 2549-8282
Book:
Lamintang, P.A.F., Lamintang, T. 2012. Hukum Penitensier Indonesia. Jakarta: Sinar Grafika.
Hutauruk, R.H. 2013. Penanggulangan Kejahatan Korporasi Melalui Pendekatan Restoratif

– Suatu Terobosan Hukum. Jakarta: Sinar Grafika
Marlina. 2011. Hukum Penitensier. Bandung: Refika Aditama.
Sugandhi, R.1980. Kitab Undang-Undang Hukum Pidana (K.U.H.P) Dengan Penjelasannya,

Surabaya: Usaha Nasional
Suharyono. 2012. Pembaharuan Pidana Denda di Indonesia. Jakarta: Papas Sinar Sinanti.
Sujono, AR., Daniel, B. 2011. Komentar dan Pembahasan Undang-Undang Nomor 35 Tahun
2009 Tentang Narkotika. Jakarta: Sinar Grafika.
Journals/Papers/Articles/Proceedings:
Adiansyah, A., & Sukihananto, S. (2017). Kekerasan Fisik Dan Psikologis Pada Narapidana Lansia Di
Lembaga Pemasyarakatan Jawa Barat. Jurnal Keperawatan Indonesia, 20(3), 168–175.
https://doi.org/10.7454/jki.v20i3.623
Ahishakiye, E., Taremwa, D., & Omulo, E. O. (2017). A Secure Web Based Records Management
System for Prisons: A Case of Kisoro Prison in Uganda. International Journal of Computer
(IJC) International Journal of Computer (IJC, 24(1), 146–158.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/316408029
Bucerius, S. M., & Haggerty, K. D. (2019). Fentanyl behind bars: The implications of synthetic
opiates on prisoners and correctional officers. International Journal of Drug Policy, 71, 133–
138. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.drugpo.2019.05.018
Bustan, R., & Sutiasasmitha, E. (2018). Pengabdian Kepada Masyarakat Pelayanan Konseling
Individu dan Kelompok pada Warga Binaan di Lembaga Pemasyarakatan Wanita Tangerang.
JURNAL Al-AZHAR INDONESIA SERI HUMANIORA, 4(4), 236.
https://doi.org/10.36722/sh.v4i4.301
Citrawan, H. (2017). MELAMPAUI PEMASYARAKATAN : ANALISIS WACANA HAK ASASI

MANUSIA DALAM KEBIJAKAN KOREKSIONAL INDONESIA ( BEYOND ‘
PEMASYARAKATAN ’: A HUMAN RIGHTS DISCOURSE ANALYSIS ON THE. 123–136.
Dias. (2013). Organized Crime in Brazilian Prisons: The Example of the PCC. International Journal
of Criminology and Sociology, 397–408. https://doi.org/10.6000/1929-4409.2013.02.37
Faktor, A., Perubahan, P., & Hadiono, A. (2016). Analisis faktor pendukung perubahan perilaku
warga binaan pemasyarakatan rumah tahanan negara klas iib rangkasbitung. VIII(1), 31–57.
19
Kolind, T. (2015). Drugs and discretionary power in prisons: The officer’s perspective. International
Journal of Drug Policy, 26(9), 799–807. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.drugpo.2015.04.014
Latif, U., & Syarif, M. (2019). Urgensi Layanan Konseling Bagi Wanita Binaan (Studi Di Lembaga
Pemasyarakatan Kelas Iii Sigli). Jurnal AL-IJTIMAIYYAH: Media Kajian Pengembangan
Masyarakat Islam, 5(2), 21–36. https://doi.org/10.22373/al-ijtimaiyyah.v5i2.4778
Ortiz, J. M. (2018). Gangs and environment : A comparative analysis of prison and street gangs. 2(1),
97–117.
Pont, J., Enggist, S., Stöver, H., Williams, B., Greifinger, R., & Wolff, H. (2018). Prison health care
governance: Guaranteeing clinical independence. American Journal of Public Health, 108(4),
472–476. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2017.304248
Ruiz-Hernández, J. A., García-Jiménez, J. J., Llor-Esteban, B., & Godoy-Fernández, C. (2015). Risk
factors for intimate partner violence in prison inmates. European Journal of Psychology Applied
to Legal Context, 7(1), 41–49. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejpal.2014.11.003
Sajida, P. W., & Moeljadi, M. (2018). the Effect of Strategic Leadership and Role Conflict To
Employee’S Commitments With Work Stress As Mediation. Jurnal Aplikasi Manajemen, 16(3),
440–447. https://doi.org/10.21776/ub.jam.2018.016.03.08
Stres, M., & Lembaga, P. (2019). Manajemen stres petugas lembaga pemasyarakatan kelas ii a
subang. 01.
Suryono, A., Domai, T., & Fefta Wijaya, A. (n.d.). Implementation of Deradicalization Policy for
Terrorism Prisoners: An Indonesian Experience. International Journal of Management and
Administrative Sciences International Journal of Management and Administrative Sciences
(IJMAS), 3(10), 2225–722501. www.ijmas.org
Teti Devita Sari, & Ami Widyastuti. (2015). Hubungan Antara Kecerdasan Emosi dengan
Kemampuan Manajemen Konflik Pada Istri. Jurnal Psikologi UIN Sultan Syarif Kasim Riau,
11(Juni), 49–54.
Document:
Kitab Undang-Undang Hukum Pidana (K.U.H.P.) dan Kitab Undang-Undang Hukum Acara Pidana
(K.U.H.A.P). 2007. Jakarta: Rineka Cipta
Undang-Undang Republik Indonesia Nomor 35 Tahun 2009 Tentang Narkotika. 2011. Jakarta: SL
Media.
Peraturan Direktur Jenderal Pemasyarakatan Nomor PAS-132.OT.03.03 Tahun 2010 Tentang

“Syarat dan Tata Cara Pelaksanaan Asimilasi, Pembebasan Bersyarat, Cuti Menjelang Bebas
dan Cuti Bersyarat Serta Pemberian Remisi Terhadap Narapidana yang Dipidana Selain
Pidana Pokok juga Dipidana Tambahan Membayar Uang Pengganti”
Other Sources:
20
Law And Justice
e-ISSN : 2549-8282
Galaway, B, Hudson, J. 1990. Criminal Justice, New York : Criminal Justice (Online) tersedia:
http://www.restorativejustice.org, diunduh 30 September 2013.
Handoko, D.L. 2006. Pengumpulan Data Dengan Observasi, (online), tersedia: http://danang-leo-
handoko.blogspot.com/2012/02/pengumpulan-data-dengan-observasi.html, diunduh 24
Oktober 2013.
Moleong. 2006. Kualitatif. Metode Penelitian Kualitatif, (online), tersedia:

http://www.scribd.com/doc/53171929/METODOLOGI-PENELITIAN-KUALITATIF-Lexy-
Moleong, diunduh 24 Oktober 2013.
Peraturan Pemerintah Pengganti Undang-Undang Nomor 18 Tahun 1960. (Online), tersedia:

http://hukum.unsrat.ac.id/uu/uu_18_prp_1960.htm, diunduh 24 Oktober 2013.
Rancangan Undang-Undang Kitab Undang-Undang Hukum Pidana – RUU KUHP 2012. Lembaga
Studi Dan Advokasi Masyarakat. (Online), tersedia: http://elsam.or.id, diunduh 24 Oktober
2013.
Sugeng. 2012. Tujuan Sistem Pemasyarakatan, Jakarta : Segalanya Tentang Ilmu Pemasyarakatan
(Online) tersedia: http://kepemasyarakatan.blogspot.com diunduh 24 Oktober 2013.
UII. 2013. Ekonomi Rasional. Teori Pilihan Rasional, (online), tersedia:

http://ekonomirasional.blogspot.com/2013/03/teori-pilihan-rasional.html, diunduh 24 Oktober
2013.
21

Implementation of Criminal Penalty Instead of Fines About Penal Purpose For Narcotics Prisoners (Case Study in Class I Penitentiary Medan)

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Implementation of Criminal Penalty Instead of Fines About Penal Purpose For Narcotics Prisoners (Case Study in Class I Penitentiary Medan)

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Law And Justice

(Leave this header blank) Vol. xx, No. x, xxx, pp.xxx-xxx