Abstract
The recent history of Indonesian criminal law is thus marked by a steady change of the spheres of validity of two different systems of criminal law.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsPreview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Cf. Smit, op. cit. p. 227, Kahin, op. cit. p. 427, Dorothy Woodman, op. cit. p. 256.
See art. 2 of the Constitution, see also Logemann, Staatsrecht, p. 39 note 2.
This may be assumed because there is no transitional law stipulation for the recovery of these areas, cf. M.D.B., 1951 ‘De gelding van vroeger recht’, p. 10 and R. Sastranegara, op. cit. p. 11 and p. 10 note 23.
Cf. Lemaire, Het Recht in Indonesië, p. 272.
One can not be punished by virtue of unwritten principles. This rule has been neglected by Oemar Seno Adji in his postscript in Hukum 1959 No. 5–6 p. 47–48, who emphazises too much the transition of functions. In the author’s opinion, the transition of functions is ruled by transitional law, including art. 8 of the Agreement of Transfer and art. 192 of the Constitution. Consequently, provisions such as art. 104 of the W.v.S. I. were no longer binding.
For a brief review of the statements of Supomo, Soewandi, Utrecht, Thung Tiang Piet, Moedikdo Moeliono, Lemaire, and Oemar Seno Adji, see ‘Aneka Warna Hukum Pidana Indonesia’, Hukum 1959 no. 5–6 p. 31–38. However, Utrecht is well aware of the existing dualism, only he assumes that in practice the K.U.H.P. was being applied throughout Indonesia, see his Pengantar, p. 184 note 30, and his Hukum Pidana I, 1958 p. 55. This opinion clashes with his own view, discussed in the above mentioned article, where he confuses the K.U.H.P. with the W.v.S. I. since art. 124 bis and 161 bis are mentioned by him as provisions of the “KUH-Pidana” whereas those articles are absent in the K.U.H.P.
Decrees No. 108, 109, 110, 111 and 112 of the President, B.N.R.I.S. 1950 No. 13.
Presidential decree No. 113, B.N.R.I.S. 1950 No. 14.
Presidential decrees No. 126 and 127, B.N.R.I.S. 1950 No. 18.
Decrees No. 137, 138, 139, 140, 141, 142 and 143, B.N.R.I.S. 1950 No. 23.
Peraturan Pemerintah Pengganti Undang-undang 1950 No. 1, Government Ordinance with the rank of Law, entered into force on March 13, 1950, amended by Undang-undang 1950 No. 8 of June 21, 1950 with retroactive effect. See Koesnodiprodjo, op. cit. 1950 p. 165 ff and p. 81 ff.
Cf. E. Bonn and R. H. K. Sosrodanukusumo, Tuntutan Pidana, 1958 p. 284/285.
Presidential Decree No. 125, B.N.R.I.S. 1950 No. 18.
Art. 2 of the Constitution.
Art. 50 of the Constitution.
Cf. M.D.B., 1953 ‘Territoriale verscheidenheid’, p. 29, Dormeier, op. cit. p. 110, H. J. van Schravendijk, Buku Peladjaran tentang Hukum Pidana Indonesia, 1956 p. 62, Utrecht, Hukum Pidana p. 55, Oemar Seno Adji, ‘Kemerdekaan Pers di Indonesia’, Hukum 1956 No. 1–2 p. 15, Bonn c.s. op. cit. p. 284/285, R. Tresna, Azas-azas Hukum Pidana, 1959 p. 190, ‘Aneka Warna Hukum Pidana Indonesia’, Hukum 1959 No. 5–6 p. 35.
Bonn and Sosrodanukusumo, op. cit. p. 284/285, Utrecht, op. cit. p. 55, R. Tresna, op. cit. p. 190 and Oemar Seno Adji in his postscript in Hukum 1959 No. 5–6 p. 48–49.
M.D.B. 1953 ‘Territoriale verscheidenheid’ p. 29.
Different Dormeier, op. cit. p. 113 according to whom Act No. 20 1946 is only binding in the areas where Act No. 1 1946 has been effectual. This is probably also the opinion of Tresna, op. cit. p. 189 who considers Act No. 20 as a law amending the K.U.H.P.
See stencil of the Parliament No. 2575/Red/Mh, or T.L.N. No. 1660, see Hukum 1959 No. 5–6 p. 131–132. Act No. 22 1946, Undang-undang pentjatatan nikah, talak dan rudjuk, Koesnodiprodjo, op. cit. 1946 p. 73 ff, which has the same concluding stipulation as Act No. 1 1946, was also considered binding in Java, Madura and Sumatra only, cf. M.D.B., 1952, ‘Islamitische Huwelijken, Verstotingen en Herroepingen van verstotingen op Java, Madura en Sumatra’, p. 125 ff. See T.L.N. 694.
See decree of the Minister of Justice of June 21, 1954 No. J.B. 4/3/2, T.L.N. No. 641 juncto decree of August 18, 1954, No. J.B. 4/4/20 T.L.N. No. 642, which abolished the self-governing courts in Kotawaringin, Kutai, Sambaliung, Gunungtabur and Bulungan by virtue of Emergency Law 1951 No. 1. These areas are within the recovered areas of Kalimantan.
Op. cit. p. 286/287.
See also Tresna, op. cit. p. 192 and ‘Aneka Warna’, Hukum 1959 No. 5–6 p. 40–41.
M.D.B. 1953, ‘Territoriale verscheidenheid’, p. 30, M.D.B. 1953, ‘Forum Privilegiatum voor Hoge Ambtsdragers’, p. 42.
Undang-undang Darurat No. 29 1950, L.N. 1950 No. 54 confirmed as Law by Undang-undang 1951 No. 22, L.N. 1951 No. 117.
On the occasion of the confirmation of the Emergency Law as a Law in 1951.
Muhammad Yamin, Proklamasi dan Konstitusi Republik Indonesia, 1952 p. 92. Cf. Lemaire, Het Recht in Indonesië, p. 124 note 4: the Costa Rican Constitution of November 1949 is also inspired by the Universal Declaration.
But the rule of art. 14(2) of the Constitution is not identical with the stipulation incorporated in art. 1(1) of the K.U.H.P. and the W.v.S. I., because the first is exclusively a rule of non-retroactivity of the criminal law, whereas by the latter it is also prescribed that the criminal law must be statute law. Therefore, it is not correct to state that the rule nullum delictum nulla poena sine praevia lege poenali was incorporated in the Constitution, see Utrecht, Pengantar, p. 391, Hukum Pidana p. 197, Moeljatno, op. cit. p. 18, and Dormeier, op. cit. p. 114–115. For criticism, see Han Bing Siong, ‘Beberapa Tjatatan tentang dan berhubung dengan buku Mr Drs E. Utrecht, Pengantar dalam Hukum Indonesia’, in Madjalah Hukum dan Masjarakat 1959, Tah. IV No. 1 p. 29.
English text derived from Yearbook on Human Rights for 1949, 1951 p. 112 ff.
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 1961 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Siong, H.B. (1961). The Legal Structure in the United States of Indonesia. In: An Outline of the Recent History of Indonesian Criminal Law. Verhandelingen van het Koninklijk Instituut voor Taal-, Land- en Volkenkunde. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-4967-1_4
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-4967-1_4
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-94-017-4668-7
Online ISBN: 978-94-017-4967-1
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive