Name : Geraldo Jeremy Pardamean

Class :I
NIM : 235010100111137
Topic : Criminal Law

Lifetime Imprisonment vs Death Penalty

In The Prespective of Human Rights

The controversial issues in criminal law in Indonesia is an endless debate,

especially lifetime imprisonment and death penalty issues. Both of them always
regarding into human rights, human rights usually used to be anti-thesis from
abilitionist side and retentionist side to defense their argument about death penalty and
lifetime imprisonment. Both of article that I choose to do this essay mostly talk about
pro and contra, background, fact, and relatives fact to improve each other side, there is
deat penalty and lifetime imprisonment. In this essay, I’m going to compare and
conclude the diffrence between lifetime imprisonment and death penalty.

The first article that explain about lifetime imprisonment in KUHP, how lifetime
imprisonment can be sentenced, and human rights prespective towards lifetime
imprisonment. In KUHP or Indonesian criminal code, lifetime imprisonment imposed to
a crime that is dangerous to the general public, crime against friendly countries, and
other kind of crimes that cause death or take victims. The first article uses qualitative
method, the writer obtain the sources of article from the data in the form of a sentence
and turn it into systematic and effective paragraph. With the verdict of lifetime
imprisonment, the convicted must carry out his/her sentence and lose his/her freedom
to be fostered in the prison, prisoner who is sentenced lifetime imprisonment also have
a little chance to reintegrating into society. There is some reason that makes lifetime
imprisonment is inhumane because if we look at Article 5 of the Correctional Law No.5
of 1995 civilization system in Indonesia can be implemented based on the principles of
protection, equality of treatment and service, educationl, guidance, respect for human
dignity, loss of freedom is the only suffering, and guranteed the right to stay in touch
with certain families and people, all of the principles also appllies to the death penalty
prisoner, but not with lifetime imprisonment prisoner. According to article 36
paragraph (1) letter c of the Minister of Law and Human Rights of the Republic of
Indonesia No.21 of 2013 remissions, assimilation, leave, visiting family, parole, free
leave, and conditional leave which regulates that leave from visiting family cannot be
given to a convict who got life sentence.

The execution of life sentences in the Indonesian legal system is argued to be in

conflict with human rights, specifically the right to independent living as outlined by
Pancasila values and the 1945 constitution. Within Indonesia's criminal justice
framework, life imprisonment serves as an alternative to the death penalty. It is
associated with a subsidiary role, acting as a replacement for capital punishment in
cases where the maximum penalty could be death. Life imprisonment is a categorized
criminal sanction that can be chosen for implementation.

The second article talks about death penalty in perspective of human rights.
Article explain what kinds of crimes that can be punish by death penalty, pro and contra
perspective towards death penalty, death penalty in human rights and the 1945
constitution. The author of this article is using normative legal research method,
conducted by examining secondary data in the form of literature. Secondary data it
comes from 1945 Consitution, legislation in the field of Human Rights, and The Criminal
Law Code.

According to Criminal Code, death penalty can be convict into a crime that
qualified as serious crimes. There is the crimes that qualified as serious crimes and can
be given death penalty, first, Article 104 of the Criminal Code states; "Makar with the
intent to kill the president and vice president, or with the intent of depriving their
independence or make them not able to govern, punishable by death or life
imprisonment or criminal for a certain time, the longest twenty years." Second,
encourage or invite other countries to attack Indonesia, Article 111 of the Criminal Code
states; "Whoever contacts with foreign countries, with a king or tribe with the intent of
arousing it to commit acts of hostility or war against the state, or reinforce the intention
to, or pledged in the act, or help prepare the act shall be punishable with imprisonment
fifteen years. "" If hostilities or war; it's punishable by death or life imprisonment or
imprisonment for a certain period of time a maximum of twenty years. " Third, if
someone protect or help other country when fought against Indonesia, it regulate on
Article 124. Fourth, murder that has been planned in advance, it regulate on Article 340
of the Criminal Code. Fifth, theft that makes violence and get severe injury or death, it
regulate on Article 365 of the Criminal Code. If we take a look at previous sentence,
some crimes act that could face the death penalty are serious crimes, pro side who
support death penalty think that death penalty it’s must be given to the criminals,
because they think the person who do the committed the crimes, had already violated
other people human right, and why we must defend the criminals human rights if they
didn’t defend other people human rights, pro side also argument death penalty must be
carried out in order to maintain legal certainity. Retentionist side, or in other word the
contra side reject death penalty based on human rights, they said death penalty will
violate undeniable right to life from god that has given to the human when his/her in
the womb of his mother. According to Universal Declaration of Articles 3 and 5 which
gurantees the right of human to live. Article 3 states that; every person has the right to
life, the right to liberty and security of personal self. Article 5 mentions that; "No one
shall be subjected to torture or cruel, treated or punished inhumanely or insulted".
Retentionist side also had an argument based on Second Amandement of the 1945
Constitution Article 28A of the 1945 Constitution declare that written: : "Everyone has
the right to live and to defend life and living". As for the content of Article 28, first
paragraph 1 are: "The right to life, freedom from torture, freedom of thought and
conscience, freedom of religion, freedom from enslavement, recognition as a person
before the law, and the right not to be prosecuted on the basis of retroactive law is a
human right that can not be reduced under any circumstances ". In Article 28A,
paragraph 1 of the 1945 Constitution declare that: "Every person shall respect the
human rights of others in the orderly life of society, nation and country". While Article 9
paragraph (1) of Law Number 39 of 1999 on Human Rights restate that "everyone has
the right to life, survival and improve the standard of living".
Source : https://images.app.goo.gl/sidE2isWz4UJ6rGDA

According to the above diagram, shows that death penalty in Indonesia always
ascending from 1998 until 2017, it conclude that Indonesia still consist to do death
penalty, especially in extraordinary crime.

In conclusions, there are always be pro and contra among lifetime penalty and death
penalty, both of them regulary used to be punishment in extraordinary crime. The two
articles spells out why lifetime prisonment can be punished, why death penalty can be
punished, what is the philosophy of the sentence, humman rights prespective also
provided from the both of the articles. I can conclude the weakness of both of the
articles that I take is there is no actual case that is happen in Indonesia to support the
topic in the articles, if there is an actual case that given by the writter, the reader maybe
would be understood the topic deeply and clearly, especially in human rights
prespective.

Refrences

Masrur, T.(2021). LIFETIME IMPRISONMENT IN THE PERSPECTIVE OF HUMAN

RIGHTS. Journal of Law and Legal Reform, Vol. 2, no. 2, pp. 311-320.
Yanto. O.(2016). DEATH PENALTY AND THE RIGHT TO LIFE IN HUMAN RIGHTS
PERSPECTIVE, THE 1945 CONSTITUTION OF THE REPUBLIC OF INDONESIA, AND
INDONESIAN LAW. Journal Yustisia, Vol. 5, no. 3, pp. 643-659.