Sentencing Inconsistencies in Terrorism Cases in Indonesia: Issues of Enforcement and Fairness

This article examines the mechanisms for prosecuting and sentencing prisoners convicted of terrorism offences in Indonesia, using case studies to illustrate inconsistencies and discrepancies in legal processes. It begins by briefly outlining the legal processes for criminal sentencing and the realit...

Full description

Saved in:  
Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Fenton, Adam J. (Author)
Format: Electronic Article
Language:English
Published: 2024
In: Perspectives on terrorism
Year: 2024, Volume: 18, Issue: 4, Pages: 106-130
Online Access: Volltext (kostenfrei)
Volltext (kostenfrei)
Journals Online & Print:
Drawer...
Check availability: HBZ Gateway
Keywords:

MARC

LEADER 00000caa a22000002c 4500
001 1923190377
003 DE-627
005 20250616162551.0
007 cr uuu---uuuuu
008 250417s2024 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c
024 7 |a 10.19165/2024.4634  |2 doi 
035 |a (DE-627)1923190377 
035 |a (DE-599)KXP1923190377 
040 |a DE-627  |b ger  |c DE-627  |e rda 
041 |a eng 
084 |a 2,1  |2 ssgn 
100 1 |a Fenton, Adam J.  |e VerfasserIn  |4 aut 
245 1 0 |a Sentencing Inconsistencies in Terrorism Cases in Indonesia: Issues of Enforcement and Fairness 
264 1 |c 2024 
336 |a Text  |b txt  |2 rdacontent 
337 |a Computermedien  |b c  |2 rdamedia 
338 |a Online-Ressource  |b cr  |2 rdacarrier 
520 |a This article examines the mechanisms for prosecuting and sentencing prisoners convicted of terrorism offences in Indonesia, using case studies to illustrate inconsistencies and discrepancies in legal processes. It begins by briefly outlining the legal processes for criminal sentencing and the realities of sentencing practices in the Indonesian context. Data on arrests, sentencing, and executions of terrorism suspects in the period 2003-2015 are analysed, revealing that over ninety percent of Indonesia’s convicted terrorists were sentenced to ten years or less in prison, with only a small percentage receiving longer sentences or the death penalty. The article argues that while sentencing of terrorists is overwhelmingly lenient, the lack of sentencing guidelines, an emphasis on judicial discretion, absence of the doctrine of precedent, lack of access to previous decisions of lower courts, and opacity of sentencing outcomes in reported decisions all contribute to inconsistency in judicial reasoning and sentencing, ultimately denying natural justice to individuals who come before the courts. The second part of the article examines individual cases which illustrate particular aspects of terrorism sentencing, such as excessive lenience or harshness, inaccurate or opaque indictments/judgements, and the treatment of women and child terrorism offenders. 
650 4 |a Indonesia 
650 4 |a Terrorism 
650 4 |a Sentencing 
650 4 |a Judicial discretion 
650 4 |a Fairness 
650 4 |a natural justice 
650 4 |a Law Enforcement 
650 4 |a Prosecution 
650 4 |a Imprisonment 
773 0 8 |i Enthalten in  |t Perspectives on terrorism  |d Vienna : Terrorism Research Initiative (TRI), 2007  |g 18(2024), 4, Seite 106-130  |h Online-Ressource  |w (DE-627)77139988X  |w (DE-600)2741257-X  |w (DE-576)396693253  |x 2334-3745  |7 nnas 
773 1 8 |g volume:18  |g year:2024  |g number:4  |g pages:106-130 
856 4 0 |u https://www.jstor.org/stable/27349917  |x Verlag  |z kostenfrei  |3 Volltext 
856 4 0 |u https://doi.org/10.19165/2024.4634  |x Resolving-System  |z kostenfrei  |3 Volltext 
951 |a AR 
ELC |a 1 
LOK |0 000 xxxxxcx a22 zn 4500 
LOK |0 001 4706587158 
LOK |0 003 DE-627 
LOK |0 004 1923190377 
LOK |0 005 20250616162551 
LOK |0 008 250417||||||||||||||||ger||||||| 
LOK |0 040   |a DE-21-110  |c DE-627  |d DE-21-110 
LOK |0 092   |o n 
LOK |0 852   |a DE-21-110 
LOK |0 852 1  |9 00 
LOK |0 935   |a krzo 
OAS |a 1 
ORI |a WA-MARC-krimdoka001.raw