DASAR PENGHAPUS PIDANA

Summary

This video script discusses the concept of 'exemptions from punishment' in criminal law. It explains various legal defenses such as lack of responsibility due to mental incapacity (Article 44), the concept of coercion (force majeure), and self-defense in cases of imminent threats. Additionally, it touches on legal exceptions in special situations like emergency circumstances and the conflict of legal duties, highlighting how these exemptions are regulated in the Indonesian Penal Code (KUHP). The explanation also includes the nuances between legitimate self-defense, emergency situations, and the role of commands in specific legal contexts.

Takeaways

• 😀 The concept of 'grounds for elimination' in criminal law is discussed, with distinctions made between 'grounds for eliminating criminal liability,' 'grounds for eliminating prosecution,' and 'grounds for eliminating punishment.'
• 😀 From a subjective perspective, criminal liability can be eliminated based on the individual’s mental capacity, as stated in Article 44 of the Penal Code (KUHP), where individuals with mental incapacity (e.g., insanity) cannot be held criminally responsible.
• 😀 Objectively, actions that are deemed necessary for self-defense are considered valid, as per Article 49. The self-defense must be proportional to the threat posed, meaning the response should be balanced with the harm that would occur from the attack.
• 😀 The Penal Code includes specific articles (e.g., Articles 44, 48, 49, 50, 51) that define various grounds for eliminating criminal liability, with some exceptions such as in the case of conspiracies among family members (Article 221).
• 😀 Force majeure or 'duress' is another ground for eliminating criminal liability, with absolute duress involving external forces (e.g., human force) and relative duress where the threat is inevitable but can be avoided with reasonable effort.
• 😀 Duress can be caused by external human action or natural events. Absolute duress refers to situations where there is no opportunity to avoid the action, while relative duress allows for some opportunity to evade the threat.
• 😀 The 'state of emergency' (or necessity defense) is a legal ground for justifying actions that would normally be unlawful, as long as they are committed to prevent a greater harm, such as saving one’s life by harming another’s.
• 😀 There is a distinction between 'state of emergency' and 'self-defense.' The former relates to preventing harm to oneself or others in extreme situations, while self-defense involves responding to an immediate unlawful attack on oneself or others.
• 😀 Self-defense is only permissible when the attack is imminent and unlawful, and the defensive actions must be necessary and proportional to the threat posed. If excessive, the self-defense claim could be invalid.
• 😀 Actions performed under a direct order (e.g., in military or professional settings) are also grounds for eliminating criminal liability. However, the legality of these actions depends on the authenticity of the command and the circumstances surrounding it.

Q & A

What is the core topic discussed in the transcript?

The transcript discusses the legal concept of 'Dasar Penghapus Pidana' (grounds for the removal of criminal responsibility) in Indonesian criminal law, focusing on various legal exceptions that can exempt individuals from criminal liability.

What are the main categories of 'Dasar Penghapus Pidana' mentioned in the script?

The main categories discussed are: grounds for the removal of criminal responsibility related to the subject (the perpetrator), the object (the act committed), and specific legal exceptions such as insanity, force, self-defense, and legal orders.

How is 'insanity' (Pasal 44) treated in Indonesian criminal law?

According to Pasal 44, a person who commits a crime while suffering from a mental disorder (insanity) is not criminally liable, even if the crime was committed intentionally.

What is 'daya paksa' (force) and how is it defined in the context of Indonesian law?

Daya paksa refers to coercion or force, where a person commits an act due to an external force, not by their own volition. The force can either be absolute (irresistible) or relative (avoidable).

What is the difference between 'absolute force' and 'relative force'?

Absolute force refers to a situation where the person cannot resist the force applied to them, while relative force refers to a situation where the person could potentially escape or avoid the force but does not.

What does the term 'keadaan darurat' (emergency situation) mean in the context of this law?

Keadaan darurat refers to an emergency situation where a person violates the law to prevent a greater harm or danger, often due to a conflict between legal obligations or legal interests.

What is the distinction between 'self-defense' (pembelaan diri) and 'emergency situation' (keadaan darurat)?

Self-defense involves a direct response to an immediate attack, where the action taken is necessary to protect oneself or others. An emergency situation, however, may involve a violation of the law to avoid a greater danger, without a direct attack involved.

Can an individual use 'self-defense' if there is no immediate or direct attack?

No, self-defense (pembelaan diri) can only be used in response to a direct and immediate attack, as it is necessary to protect oneself or others from harm.

How does 'self-defense' (pembelaan diri) differ from 'coercion' (daya paksa)?

Self-defense is a response to an attack that is seen as legally justified to prevent harm, whereas coercion refers to actions taken due to an external force, such as threats or other pressures, which may not involve an immediate attack.

What is the role of 'perintah jabatan' (orders of duty) in removing criminal liability?

If an individual acts under an official order or instruction (perintah jabatan), such as from a superior or as part of their duties (e.g., a soldier or doctor), they may not be criminally liable for actions taken during the execution of those duties, provided the orders were lawful.