KEWENANGAN PENYIDIK DALAM MELANJUTKAN PERKARA KDRT PASCA DITERAPKANNYA KEADILAN RESTORATIF

Abstract

Domestic violence cases have shown a significant prevalence over the last three years, and although most are settled amicably, there is occasionally an urgency that leads investigators to consider continuing the case for the sake of the victim's safety. This situation sparks debate regarding the limits of police authority in overriding peace agreements in domestic violence crimes, along with the potential for more serious criminal acts that may result from them. This Utilizing a doctrinal legal framework, this research explores the normative compatibility between the discretionary powers of law enforcement and the restorative mechanisms codified in modern regulations. The study draws upon secondary legal materials to provide a qualitative critique of how effectively Police directives harmonize with the protective mandates of the Anti-Domestic Violence Law findings indicate that police authority to continue domestic violence cases, despite an existing peace agreement, is based on the investigator's discretionary authority through the Restorative Justice mechanism. The withdrawal of a report by the victim does not automatically terminate the case if indications of violence with fatal impacts are found, where fatality criteria extend beyond physical injury to include significant disruption to daily activities resulting from psychological, sexual, or economic violence. Under such conditions, the safety of the victim and the prevention of recidivism become primary priorities that override the peace agreement.