Reconstructing Restitution Oriented Prosecutorial Demands in Digital Illegal Investment Case
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.33751/palar.v12i4.237Abstrak
Indonesia has gradually built a legal framework for victim restitution, yet it is seldom used in economic crimes with mass victims. This article asks why restitution remains dormant in the prosecution of digital illegal investment and designs a restitution-oriented model for prosecutorial demands. Taking Bengkulu District Court Decision Number 14/Pid.Sus/2025/PN Bgl as its point of departure, the study combines statutory, case, and conceptual approaches with interviews with the prosecutors and judge involved, analyzed qualitatively and prescriptively. It identifies three mutually reinforcing obstacles. The first is normative: restitution under the Witness and Victim Protection Law depends on a designation by the Witness and Victim Protection Agency and is not attached by default to the offense of unlicensed fund-raising. The second is structural: victim data are compiled to prove guilt rather than to calculate entitlements. The third is cultural: prosecutorial success is measured by conviction and sentence severity. In the case examined, a Rp10 billion fine payable to the state coexisted with roughly Rp1.6 billion in unrecovered victim losses. The article proposes a five-stage dual-track prosecution model built on a layered indictment, a net-loss matrix, and a restitution clause, consistent with the 2023 Penal Code and the 2025 Criminal Procedure Code.
Keywords: Digital illegal investment; Dual-track prosecution; Prosecutorial demand; Restitution; Victim recovery.
Referensi
A. Legislation
Indonesia. Undang-Undang tentang Peraturan Hukum Pidana. UU No. 1 Tahun 1946.
___________. Undang-Undang tentang Hukum Acara Pidana. UU No. 8 Tahun 1981.
___________. Undang-Undang tentang Perubahan atas Undang-Undang Nomor 7 Tahun 1992 tentang Perbankan. UU No. 10 Tahun 1998.
___________. Undang-Undang tentang Perlindungan Saksi dan Korban. UU No. 13 Tahun 2006.
___________. Undang-Undang tentang Informasi dan Transaksi Elektronik. UU No. 11 Tahun 2008.
___________. Undang-Undang tentang Pencegahan dan Pemberantasan Tindak Pidana Pencucian Uang. UU No. 8 Tahun 2010.
___________. Undang-Undang tentang Perubahan atas Undang-Undang Nomor 13 Tahun 2006 tentang Perlindungan Saksi dan Korban. UU No. 31 Tahun 2014.
___________. Undang-Undang tentang Perubahan atas Undang-Undang Nomor 11 Tahun 2008 tentang Informasi dan Transaksi Elektronik. UU No. 19 Tahun 2016.
___________. Undang-Undang tentang Kitab Undang-Undang Hukum Pidana. UU No. 1 Tahun 2023.
___________. Undang-Undang tentang Pengembangan dan Penguatan Sektor Keuangan. UU No. 4 Tahun 2023.
___________. Undang-Undang tentang Perubahan Kedua atas Undang-Undang Nomor 11 Tahun 2008 tentang Informasi dan Transaksi Elektronik. UU No. 1 Tahun 2024.
___________. Undang-Undang tentang Kitab Undang-Undang Hukum Acara Pidana. UU No. 20 Tahun 2025.
___________. Peraturan Pemerintah tentang Pemberian Kompensasi, Restitusi, dan Bantuan kepada Saksi dan Korban. PP No. 7 Tahun 2018.
___________. Peraturan Pemerintah tentang Perubahan atas Peraturan Pemerintah Nomor 7 Tahun 2018 tentang Pemberian Kompensasi, Restitusi, dan Bantuan kepada Saksi dan Korban. PP No. 35 Tahun 2020.
Kejaksaan Republik Indonesia. Peraturan Kejaksaan tentang Penghentian Penuntutan Berdasarkan Keadilan Restoratif. Perja No. 15 Tahun 2020.
Kepolisian Negara Republik Indonesia. Peraturan Kepolisian tentang Penanganan Tindak Pidana Berdasarkan Keadilan Restoratif. Perpol No. 8 Tahun 2021.
Mahkamah Agung Republik Indonesia. Peraturan Mahkamah Agung tentang Tata Cara Penyelesaian Permohonan dan Pemberian Restitusi dan Kompensasi kepada Korban Tindak Pidana. Perma No. 1 Tahun 2022.
B. Journal
Akmal, Moch Naufall Nurfauzan, and Jejen Hendar. “Pengawasan terhadap Praktik Money Game dengan Skema Ponzi di Platform TikTok Ditinjau dari Undang-Undang Nomor 21 Tahun 2011 tentang Otoritas Jasa Keuangan.” Bandung Conference Series: Law Studies 4, no. 2 (2024). https://doi.org/10.29313/bcsls.v4i2.15717.
Al Farisi, Yahya, et al. “Tindak Pidana Pencucian Uang oleh Indra Kenz: Analisis Hukum Berdasarkan Undang-Undang No. 8 Tahun 2010.” Jurnal Cendekia Hukum Indonesia 1, no. 2 (2025). https://doi.org/10.71417/jchi.v1i2.82.
Amelia, Gonaricha, and Ade Mahmud. “Penegakan Hukum terhadap Pelaku Tindak Pidana Penipuan Investasi Ilegal Uang Kripto di Perusahaan E-Dinar Coin Cash (EDCCash) Ditinjau dari Undang-Undang No. 19 Tahun 2016 Perubahan atas Undang-Undang No. 11 Tahun 2008.” Jurnal Riset Ilmu Hukum 1, no. 2 (2022). https://doi.org/10.29313/jrih.v1i2.529.
Andika, I Kadek, et al. “Perlindungan Hukum terhadap Korban Tindak Pidana Investasi Ilegal di Polresta Denpasar.” AL-DALIL: Jurnal Ilmu Sosial, Politik, dan Hukum 1, no. 3 (2023). https://doi.org/10.58707/aldalil.v1i3.562.
Damendra, Gede Agus, et al. “Legal Protection for Witness under the Witness and Victim Protection Law.” Pena Justisia: Media Komunikasi dan Kajian Hukum 23, no. 2 (2024). https://doi.org/10.31941/pj.v23i2.4130.
Hartantien, Sinarianda Kurnia. “Legal Protection for Victims of Investment Fraud.” International Journal of Social Science and Human Research 8, no. 7 (2025). https://doi.org/10.47191/ijsshr/v8-i7-03.
Justiasari, Intan, et al. “Pemulihan Kerugian Korban Tindak Pidana Penipuan dengan Modus Investasi Ilegal.” Al Qalam: Jurnal Ilmiah Keagamaan dan Kemasyarakatan 18, no. 6 (2024). https://doi.org/10.35931/aq.v18i6.3537.
Krisharyanto, Edi, and Fries Melia Salviana. “Investor Protection and Legal Enforcement: Defaults and Digital-Age Illegal Investments.” Lex Publica 12, no. 2 (2025). https://doi.org/10.58829/lp.12.2.2025.324.
Kulwa, Costantine, and Vicent Jonas. “LBL, the Digital Ponzi Scheme, and the Changing Face of Financial Scams in Tanzania: Patterns, Impact, and Prevention.” NG-Journal of Social Development 18, no. 3 (2025). https://doi.org/10.4314/ngjsd.v18i3.3.
Marantika, Meliyan, et al. “Pemenuhan Hak Korban Tindak Pidana dalam Sistem Peradilan Pidana.” Jurnal Ilmu Hukum, Humaniora dan Politik 6, no. 3 (2026). https://doi.org/10.38035/jihhp.v6i3.8000.
Nugroho, Yudistira. “Penyelesaian Hukum bagi Korban Investasi Digital Ilegal.” Fenomena 21, no. 1 (2023). https://doi.org/10.36841/fenomena.v21i1.2908.
Rangkuti, Putri Ramadhani, et al. “Perlindungan Hukum terhadap Saksi dan Korban dalam Sistem Peradilan Pidana Indonesia.” Sultan Adam: Jurnal Hukum dan Sosial 3, no. 2 (2025). https://doi.org/10.71456/sultan.v3i2.1553.
Riziq, M., and Amri. “A Critical Analysis of Restorative Justice in Indonesia's Criminal Justice System: From Punishment to Restoration.” IJLDR 3, no. 1 (2025): 11–19. https://doi.org/10.62039/ijldr.v3i1.82.
Siregar, S. “The Transformation of the Victimology Paradigm in the Indonesian Criminal Justice System: Strengthening Victim Protection through Restorative Justice and Human Rights-Based Justice Approaches.” Jurnal Ilmiah METADATA 7, no. 3 (2025). https://doi.org/10.47652/metadata.v7i3.928.
Sitorus, Kuntum Suryani, et al. “Perlindungan Hukum bagi Korban Tindak Pidana Penipuan Investasi Digital di Kota Makassar.” Gorontalo Law Review 6, no. 1 (2023). https://doi.org/10.32662/golrev.v6i1.2607.
Sumardiono, Muslim, and S. Sugianto. “Perlindungan Korban Kejahatan dalam Perspektif Viktimologi dan Sistem Peradilan Pidana.” Focus 7, no. 1 (2026). https://doi.org/10.37010/fcs.v7i1.2174.
Suprasetya, Didik, et al. “Tanggung Jawab Pelaku Tindak Pidana Penipuan Online pada Sistem Digital.” Lex Journal: Kajian Hukum dan Keadilan 9, no. 2 (2025). https://doi.org/10.25139/lex.v9i2.10992.
Thilakarathna, Anushika Sandamali, and Nayomi De Peiris. “Financial Deception in the Digital Age: Investigating Online Pyramid Schemes and Their Socioeconomic Impacts in Sri Lanka.” Journal of Financial Crime (2025). https://doi.org/10.1108/jfc-03-2025-0073.
Wicaksono, Bagas Wahyu, and Adi Sulistiyono. “Analisis terhadap Kasus Tindak Pidana Pencucian Uang Berbasis Digital.” RIGGS: Journal of Artificial Intelligence and Digital Business 4, no. 3 (2025). https://doi.org/10.31004/riggs.v4i3.1992.
Yulia, Rena, et al. “Perlindungan Hukum terhadap Korban Kejahatan pada Proses Penyelidikan dan Penyidikan dalam Sistem Peradilan Pidana.” Jurnal Hukum & Pembangunan 49, no. 3 (2019). https://doi.org/10.21143/jhp.vol49.no3.2193.
Yunara, Edi, and Taufik Kemas. “The Role of Victimology in the Protection of Crime Victims in Indonesian Criminal Justice System.” Mahadi: Indonesia Journal of Law 3, no. 1 (2024). https://doi.org/10.32734/mah.v3i01.15379.
Yuwono, Teguh Basuki Heru, and Dona Budi Kharisma. “Pyramid Scheme Crime: Problems and Oversight in Indonesia.” Pena Justisia: Media Komunikasi dan Kajian Hukum 23, no. 3 (2024). https://doi.org/10.31941/pj.v23i3.5322.
Zedner, Lucia. “Reparation and Retribution: Are They Reconcilable?” The Modern Law Review 57, no. 2 (1994): 228–50.
C. Book
Amiruddin, and Zainal Asikin. Pengantar Metode Penelitian Hukum. Jakarta: Rajawali Pers, 2012.
Arief, Barda Nawawi. Bunga Rampai Kebijakan Hukum Pidana: Perkembangan Penyusunan Konsep KUHP Baru. Jakarta: Kencana, 2008.
Efendi, Jonaedi, and Johnny Ibrahim. Metode Penelitian Hukum Normatif dan Empiris. 2nd printing. Depok: Prenadamedia Group, 2018.
Marzuki, Peter Mahmud. Penelitian Hukum. Jakarta: Kencana Prenada Media Group, 2005.
Rahardjo, Satjipto. Hukum Progresif: Sebuah Sintesa Hukum Indonesia. Yogyakarta: Genta Publishing, 2009.
Wignjosoebroto, Soetandyo. Hukum: Paradigma, Metode dan Dinamika Masalahnya. Jakarta: ELSAM and HuMa, 2002.
Zehr, Howard. Changing Lenses: A New Focus for Crime and Justice. Scottdale, PA: Herald Press, 1990.
D. Other
Bengkulu Class IA District Court Decision Number 14/Pid.Sus/2025/PN Bgl.
Interview with Melinda Nursanty, S.H., M.H., and Uswatun Hasanah, S.H., Public Prosecutors at the Bengkulu District Prosecutor's Office, 17 July 2026.
Interview with Muhammad Iqbal, S.H., M.H., Judge of the Bengkulu Class IA District Court, 15 July 2026.
United Nations General Assembly. Declaration of Basic Principles of Justice for Victims of Crime and Abuse of Power. A/RES/40/34, 29 November 1985.
Unduhan
Diterbitkan
Cara Mengutip
Terbitan
Bagian
Lisensi
Hak Cipta (c) 2026 PALAR | PAKUAN LAW REVIEW
Artikel ini berlisensiCreative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Jurnal Pakuan Law review based on the provisions Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License. / CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 this license requires that you provide appropriate credit, provide a link to the license, and indicate if any changes have been made. You may do so in any reasonable way, but not in any way that would imply that the licensor endorses you or your use. this license shall not use the material for commercial purposes. this license permits Share Alike If you mix, modify, or build upon the material, you must distribute your contributions under the same license as the original. No additional restrictions. You may not apply legal provisions or technological measures that legally restrict others from doing anything the license permits.
.png alt=)
