Analisis Yuridis Pemenuhan Hak Restitusi terhadap Korban Pemerkosaan Tindak Pidana Kekerasan Seksual (Studi Putusan No.823/Pid.B/2024/PN.Medan)

Abstract

Penelitian ini membahas perlindungan hukum dan penerapan hak restitusi bagi korban pemerkosaan, dengan studi kasus pada putusan pengadilan yang tidak mencantumkan restitusi. Fokus utama adalah analisis terhadap tidak diterapkannya hak restitusi yang secara normatif dijamin dalam Undang-Undang Nomor 12 Tahun 2022 tentang Tindak Pidana Kekerasan Seksual (UU TPKS). Penelitian ini menelaah sejauh mana korban memperoleh pemulihan melalui mekanisme restitusi serta peran aparat penegak hukum dan Lembaga Perlindungan Saksi dan Korban (LPSK). Hasil menunjukkan bahwa kendala utama terletak pada tidak diajukannya permohonan restitusi sebelum putusan, asas ultra petita yang membatasi hakim, serta lemahnya pendampingan dari lembaga terkait. Restitusi cenderung diperlakukan sebagai hak formal, bukan sebagai kewajiban negara. Penelitian ini merekomendasikan penguatan mekanisme restitusi yang lebih proaktif dan responsif terhadap kondisi korban untuk menjamin prinsip keadilan restoratif sesuai amanat UU TPKS. This research discusses legal protection and the implementation of the right to restitution for victims of the crime of rape, with a case study on a court decision that did not include restitution in its ruling. The main issue addressed in this study is how legal protection is provided to victims of rape and why the right to restitution, which is normatively guaranteed under Law Number 12 of 2022 concerning Sexual Violence Crimes (UU TPKS), is not always applied in judicial practice. The purpose of this research is to examine the extent to which victims obtain the fulfillment of their rights through restitution mechanisms, as well as to analyze the role of law enforcement officials and the Witness and Victim Protection Agency (LPSK) in ensuring that these rights are upheld. The results indicate that although the UU TPKS provides a strong legal basis for restitution, in practice, victims often do not receive it due to the absence of a formal request submitted prior to the court's verdict, while judges are bound by the ultra petita principle. Furthermore, weak coordination and limited assistance from related institutions such as LPSK also hinder the fulfillment of restitution rights. Therefore, restitution should not merely be understood as a formal right dependent on the victim’s application, but as a state obligation to provide comprehensive and just recovery for victims. This study recommends the strengthening of a more proactive and responsive restitution mechanism in line with the principle of restorative justice as mandated by the UU TPKS.