Niet Ontvankelijke Verklaard (NO) Decision on the Criminal Case of Land Grabbing Perspective of Justice

Abstrak

In land grabbing cases, the intersection of civil and criminal law has led to pre-judicial challenges, creating a sense of insecurity among those seeking justice through criminal proceedings. Furthermore, the Criminal Procedure Code does not recognize the NO (Niet Ontvankelijke Verklaard) decision. This article examines the application of the NO decision in the context of land grabbing at the initial level of criminal proceedings, focusing on its alignment with the value of justice. Using normative research methods, including case-based, statutory, and conceptual approaches, this study collects data through literature reviews and interviews, followed by qualitative analysis. The findings reveal that the NO decision, intended to resolve conflicts between criminal and civil judgments, is incompatible with the Criminal Procedure Code, which does not sanction NO decisions in criminal cases. When an indictment fails to support prosecution, the appropriate outcomes are either an acquittal or a dismissal of all charges. Issues related to land ownership should be resolved through interlocutory judgments before addressing criminal aspects. The NO decision in the land grabbing case "Number: 376.PID.B/2021/PN KOT" fails to meet the value of justice as victims remain unable to reclaim their property, the public prosecutor is unable to prove the defendant’s guilt, and the defendants remain uncertain about the land’s status. Moreover, the NO decision precludes retrial (ne bis in idem), thereby undermining the achievement of justice and legal certainty.