Melola Discovery

← Melola Discovery

Journal

Transformation of the Public Prosecution Service as the Supervisory Authority for Community Service Orders Under the National Criminal Code

Law Research Review Quarterly · Vol. 11 No. 4 (2025) · pp. 1279–1302

DOI
10.15294/lrrq.v11i4.42611
ISSN
2716-3415
Published
2025-11-30
Publisher
Universitas Negeri Semarang
Language
eng

Abstract

The enactment of Law No. 1 of 2023 (National Criminal Code/KUHP), replacing the colonial-era Criminal Code, marks a significant transformation for the Prosecutor’s Office. The institution must now shift from only executing imprisonment sentences to actively supervising community service punishments in public spaces. The prosecutor’s authority to execute court decisions is reaffirmed in recent regulations, including Article 349 paragraph (2) of Law No. 20 of 2025 on the Criminal Procedure Code (KUHAP). Nevertheless, the lack of comprehensive technical guidelines for the supervisory mechanism continues to pose ongoing challenges. This issue was examined through normative legal research with statutory and comparative approaches to assess the regulatory framework and the prosecutor’s role in executing final and binding (inkracht) court decisions. While a Prosecutor General’s Guideline exists, supervision regulations are broad and lack a specific mechanism for enforcing community service orders. The current system combines community service supervision with conditional punishment and probation, yet still treats community service as a separate category, despite its weaker implementation. The lack of supervision outside working hours increases the risk that offenders may avoid oversight, making the system overly dependent on their good faith.

Keywords

Collaboration network of the authors

40 authors · 136 co-authorship links · 1 across different organisations · showing the 40 most connected

Hover or tap a name to highlight its co-authors. Double-click to open the author's page.

  • State University of Semarang
  • Universitas Halu Oleo
  • Affiliation unknown
  • Different organisations
  • Same organisation
  • Affiliation unknown
  • Thicker line = more joint articles · bigger circle = more articles
Show as table
Co-authorOrganisationJoint articles
Ali MasyharAffiliation unknown6
Ridwan ArifinAffiliation unknown4
Anis WidyawatiAffiliation unknown4
Ratih DamayantiState University of Semarang3
Irma CahyaningtyasAffiliation unknown3
Nadhira Madania DimartiAffiliation unknown2
Rasdi RasdiAffiliation unknown2
Adrian HadiputraAffiliation unknown2
Ikram AmrullahAffiliation unknown2
Hibatullah MaajidAffiliation unknown2
Rodiyah RodiyahAffiliation unknown2
Putri Balqis Nuril HakimAffiliation unknown2
Ahmad Gelora MahardikaAffiliation unknown2
PujiyonoAffiliation unknown2
Diandra Preludio RamadaAffiliation unknown2
Firsta Rahadatul 'AisyAffiliation unknown2
Mulyo WidodoAffiliation unknown2
Wildan Azkal FikriAffiliation unknown2
Siti MursidahAffiliation unknown2
‪Eram Tunggul Pawenang‬State University of Semarang1
Muhammad AzamUniversitas Halu Oleo1
Sonny Saptoajie WicaksonoAffiliation unknown1
Indung WijayantoState University of Semarang1
Angga AnggaAffiliation unknown1
Calvin CameronAffiliation unknown1
Cahya WulandariState University of Semarang1
Dede IndraswaraAffiliation unknown1
Aisyah Nur RafidahAffiliation unknown1
Kukuh Satria WiratamaAffiliation unknown1
Shofriya Qanitatin AbidahAffiliation unknown1
Quinny Azalia PutriAffiliation unknown1
Heri PurwantoAffiliation unknown1
Didik PurnomoAffiliation unknown1
Bhanu Prakash NunnaAffiliation unknown1
Bagus Hendradi KusumaAffiliation unknown1
Indah Sri UtariAffiliation unknown1
Benny SumardianaAffiliation unknown1
Nizamuddin AliasAffiliation unknown1

Affiliations come from OpenAlex; journal OAI-PMH metadata carries none. Authors without an OpenAlex ID are matched by name, which can merge or split people.

Metadata source: OAI-PMH (metadata jurnal) https://journal.unnes.ac.id/journals/snh/oai, first harvested 6 Nov 2026, last seen 8 Nov 2026.
Original metadata (oai_dc)
<oai_dc:dc xmlns="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:oai_dc="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc/" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xsi:schemaLocation="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc/  http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc.xsd">
	<dc:title xml:lang="en">Transformation of the Public Prosecution Service as the Supervisory Authority for Community Service Orders Under the National Criminal Code</dc:title>
	<dc:creator xml:lang="en">Sasqia Putri Ramadhani</dc:creator>
	<dc:creator xml:lang="en">Muhammad Azil Maskur</dc:creator>
	<dc:subject xml:lang="en">public prosecution; community service order; national criminal code;  criminal justice system</dc:subject>
	<dc:description xml:lang="en">The enactment of Law No. 1 of 2023 (National Criminal Code/KUHP), replacing the colonial-era Criminal Code, marks a significant transformation for the Prosecutor’s Office. The institution must now shift from only executing imprisonment sentences to actively supervising community service punishments in public spaces. The prosecutor’s authority to execute court decisions is reaffirmed in recent regulations, including Article 349 paragraph (2) of Law No. 20 of 2025 on the Criminal Procedure Code (KUHAP). Nevertheless, the lack of comprehensive technical guidelines for the supervisory mechanism continues to pose ongoing challenges. This issue was examined through normative legal research with statutory and comparative approaches to assess the regulatory framework and the prosecutor’s role in executing final and binding (inkracht) court decisions. While a Prosecutor General’s Guideline exists, supervision regulations are broad and lack a specific mechanism for enforcing community service orders. The current system combines community service supervision with conditional punishment and probation, yet still treats community service as a separate category, despite its weaker implementation. The lack of supervision outside working hours increases the risk that offenders may avoid oversight, making the system overly dependent on their good faith. </dc:description>
	<dc:publisher xml:lang="en">Universitas Negeri Semarang</dc:publisher>
	<dc:date>2025-11-30</dc:date>
	<dc:type>info:eu-repo/semantics/article</dc:type>
	<dc:type>info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion</dc:type>
	<dc:format>application/pdf</dc:format>
	<dc:identifier>https://journal.unnes.ac.id/journals/snh/article/view/42611</dc:identifier>
	<dc:identifier>10.15294/lrrq.v11i4.42611</dc:identifier>
	<dc:source xml:lang="en">Law Research Review Quarterly; Vol. 11 No. 4 (2025): Articles in press; 1279-1302</dc:source>
	<dc:source>2716-3415</dc:source>
	<dc:source>10.15294/llrq.v11i4</dc:source>
	<dc:language>eng</dc:language>
	<dc:relation>https://journal.unnes.ac.id/journals/snh/article/view/42611/8545</dc:relation>
	<dc:rights xml:lang="en">Copyright (c) 2025 Law Research Review Quarterly</dc:rights>
</oai_dc:dc>