Saputra, Sony and Pradiptyo, Rimawan (2012): On Assessment of the Supreme Court Decisions in Tackling Substance Misuse in Indonesia.
Download (4082Kb) | Preview
This study aims to analyse the Indonesian Supreme Court (Mahkamah Agung) decisions to the defendants of substance misuse. The data were based on the Supreme Court decisions for substance misuse cases from 2001-2009, uploaded in putusan.mahkamahagung.or.id. The database consists of 191 cases involving 218 defendants. Logistic regression and Tobin’s logistic regression (Tobit) were used in this study to estimate the probability and the intensity of various disposals. This is inline with Becker (1968) argument that the optimal deterrence effect of a disposal arose from the probability of conviction and the intensity of punishment. The types of punishment sentenced to defendants of substance misuse cases are vary, ranging from imprisonment, fines, community service, probation and even a capital punishment. The results from logistic regression analyses showed the social costs of substance misuse was used by the Supreme Court judges to consider the value of fines sentenced to offenders. the social cost that is inflicted by the defendant was only weighed in giving fines to the defendant. On the other hand, the results from Tobit regressions showed that the Supreme Court judges did not taken into consideration the social cost of substance misuse in determining the intensity of punishment sentenced to defendants. The explicit social cost caused by the defendants of the narcotics/psychotropics case was Rp 23.7 billion (about US$ 2.37 million), however the fines charged by the Supreme Court was only Rp 5.5 billion (about US$ 550,000). Further investigation showed that the defendants who were sentenced to pay fines by the District Courts has 51.7% more probability to be sentenced with imprisonment by the Supreme Court. On the other hand, results from Tobit regressions showed that the longer the imprisonment sentenced by the District Court, the more fines were sentenced to the defendants by the Supreme Court.
|Item Type:||MPRA Paper|
|Original Title:||On Assessment of the Supreme Court Decisions in Tackling Substance Misuse in Indonesia|
|Keywords:||Narcotics, Psychotropic, Social Cost of Crime, Financial Punishment, Deterrence Effect|
|Subjects:||D - Microeconomics > D6 - Welfare Economics > D63 - Equity, Justice, Inequality, and Other Normative Criteria and Measurement
K - Law and Economics > K4 - Legal Procedure, the Legal System, and Illegal Behavior > K42 - Illegal Behavior and the Enforcement of Law
|Depositing User:||Rimawan Pradiptyo|
|Date Deposited:||03. Feb 2012 17:18|
|Last Modified:||21. Feb 2013 04:36|
Becker, G.S. (1968) ‘Crime and Punishment: An Economic Approach’, Journal of Political Economy 76.
BNN (National Narcotic Agency) & CHR-UI (Center of Health Research-UI) (2004) ‘Studi Biaya Ekonomi dan Sosial Penyalahgunaan Narkoba Di Indonesia Tahun 2004’ [The Study of Economic and Social Cost of Drugs’ Abuse in Indonesia in 2004], Depok: CHR-UI.
BNN (National Narcotic Agency) (2009) ‘Data Kasus Tindak Pidana Narkoba Di Indonesia Tahun 2001-2008’ [Data of Narcotic and Pyschotropic Penal Crime in Indonesia During 2001-2008], accessed 19 May 2009 at <http://www.bnn.go.id/portalbaru/portal/konten.php?nama=DataKasus&op=dl_data_kasus&namafile=Data%20TP%20Korban%202001-2008.pdf>.
BNN (National Narcotic Agency) & CHR-UI (Center of Health Research-UI) (2009) ‘Laporan Survei Penyalahgunaan Narkoba Di Indonesia: Studi Kerugian Ekonomi dan Sosial Akibat Narkoba, tahun 2008’ [The Report of Drugs’ Misuse Survey in Indonesia: Study of Economic and Social Cost Inflicted by Drugs, 2008] Puslitkes UI, Depok.
Bowles, R., and Florackis, C. (2007) ‘Duration of the Time to Reconviction: Evidence from UK Prisoner Discharge Data’, Journal of Criminal Justice, 35, 2005, 365-378.
Collins, D., et al. (2000) ‘Economic and Social Costs of Substance Abuse’, Bulletin on Narcotics, Volume LII, Nos. 1 and 2.
Directorate General of Customs & Excise (2007) ‘Buku Tarif Bea Masuk Indonesia 2007’ [Indonesian Customs Tariff Book 2007].
Dwiyana, R. (2008) ‘Equality before the Law VS Impunity: Suatu Dilema’ [Equality before the Law VS Impunity: a Dilemma], accessed 30 May 2010 at <http://rusmadwiyana.files.wordpress.com/.../equality-before-the-law-vs-impunity-1108.doc>.
Farley, J.E. (2004) ‘Majority - Minority Relations’, Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Grobman, G.M. (1990) ‘Stereotypes and Prejudices’, accessed 31 May 2010 at <http://remember.org/guide/History.root.stereotypes.html>
Gujarati, D.N. (2003) ‘Basic Econometric: Fourth Edition’, DCGraw-Hill Press: Singapore.
Hiariej et al (2006) ’Bunga Rampai Hukum Pidana Khusus’ [Potpourri of Special Penal Law], Jakarta: Pena.
Levitt dan Miles (2007) ‘Empirical Studi Of Criminal Punishment’, Handbook of Law and Economics, Volume 1, Chapter 7, Edited by A. Mitchell Polinsky and Steven Shavell. Elsevier B.V.
Moeljanto (2003) ’Kitab Undang-Undang Hukum Pidana (KUHP)’ [Indonesian Penal Code], Bumi Aksara, Jakarta.
Nagin, D. (1998) ‘Criminal Deterrence Research: A Review of Evidence and a Research Agenda for the Outset of the 21st Century’, In: Tonry, M. (Ed.), Crime and Justice, vol. 23, pp. 1–42. Journal of Law and Economics 38 (1), 107–139, accessed 28 May 2010 at <http://archives.drugabuse.gov/economiccosts/Chapter7.html>.
ONDCP-Office of National Drug Control Policy (2000) ‘Drug Related Crime’, accessed 28 May 2010 at <http://www.whitehousedrugpolicy.gov/publications/factsht/crime/index.html>.
Polinsky, A.M., & Shavell, S (1984) ‘The Optimal Use of Fines and Imprisonment’, Journal of Public Economics 24, 89–99.
Polinsky, A.M., & Shavell, S (2005) ‘The Theory of Public Enforcement Law’, National Bureau of Economic Research, Cambridge.
Pradiptyo, R. (2009) ‘A Certain Uncertainty; An Assessment of Courts Decision for Tackling Corruption in Indonesia 2001-2008’, Department of Economics, Faculty of Economics and Business, Universitas Gadjah Mada, Indonesia.
Undang-Undang Republik Indonesia No.22 Tahun 1997 Tentang Narkotika [Law of The Republic of Indonesia number 22 of 1997 Concerning Narcotic].
Undang-Undang Republik Indonesia Nomor 5 Tahun 1997 Tentang Psikotropika [Law of The Republic of Indonesia number 5 of 1997 Concerning Psychotropic].
UNICEF (2004) ‘HIV-AIDS Booklet’, accessed 30 May 2010 at <http://www.unicef.org/indonesia/id/HIV AIDSbooklet_part4.pdf>.
UNODC (2009) ‘World Drug Report 2009’, accessed 16 April 2010 at <http://www.unodc.org/documents/wdr/WDR_2009/WDR2009_eng_web.pdf>.
UNODC (1994) ‘Drugs and Development’, accessed 28 May 2010 at <http://www.unodc.org/pdf/Alternative%20Development/Drugs_Development.pdf>.
UNODC (2007) ‘A Century of International Drug Control’, Bulletin On Narcotics Volume LIX, Nos. 1 and 2.
UNODC (2010) ‘HIV and AIDS’, accessed 28 May 2010 at <http://www.unodc.org/unodc/en/hiv aids/index.html?ref=menuside>.
UN-United Nations (2010) ‘The Universal Declaration of Human Right’, accessed 30 May 2010 at <http://www.un.org/en/documents/udhr/index.shtml>.
Volkow, N.D. (2009) ‘Comorbidity: Addiction and Other Mental Illnesses’, National Institute on Drug Abuse 2009, accessed 30 May 2010 at <http://drugabuse.gov/researchreports/comorbidity/>.
WHO-World Health Organization (2010) ‘Amphetamine-type stimulants’, accessed 4 June 2010 at <http://www.who.int/substance_abuse/facts/ATS/en/index.html>.