LEGAL PROTECTION FOR TEACHERS IN THE EDUCATIONAL PROCESS RELATED TO THE CRIMINALIZATION OF TEACHERS

Bayu Topan

doi:10.56301/awl.v9i1.2406

Bayu Topan Universitas Pakuan

DOI: https://doi.org/10.56301/awl.v9i1.2406

Keywords: Animus Docendi, Antinomy of Norms, Criminalization of Teachers, Legal Protection, Tuchtrecht

Abstract

Teachers play a vital role as professional educators in shaping the character of the nation and enforcing discipline within the school environment. However, the phenomenon of criminalizing teachers in carrying out disciplinary functions (tuchtrecht) creates a chilling effect that can hinder pedagogical authority. This research aims to analyze the position and mechanisms of legal protection for teachers from criminalization in terms of norm antinomy, criminal law dogmatics, and jurisprudence. The research uses a normative legal method with legislative, conceptual, and case approaches, particularly concerning Law No. 35 of 2014 on Child Protection, Law No. 14 of 2005 on Teachers and Lecturers, and Supreme Court Decision No. 1554 K/Pid/2013. The research results show that educational disciplinary actions that are proportional and based on animus docendi are not automatically considered a criminal offense. Protection can be based on justifications such as orders from laws and official duties as stipulated in the Criminal Code and Law No. 1 of 2023. Preventively, professional immunity, disciplinary SOPs, and ethical oversight are required. Repressively, law enforcement needs to prioritize Restorative Justice, mens rea-based case screening, and the dismissal of cases that do not meet criminal elements.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Andario, R. (2017). Keberadaan dan peran hak mendisiplinkan (tuchtrecht) sebagai alasan pembenar di luar undang-undang dalam sistem hukum pidana Indonesia. Lex Privatum, 5(2).
Arief, B. N. (2020). Bunga rampai kebijakan hukum pidana: Perkembangan penyusunan konsep KUHP baru. Kencana.
Budoyo, S., Widodo, W., & Suyadi. (2024). Legal protection for teachers from the threat of criminalization in instilling student discipline. Pandecta Research Law Journal, 19(1), 141–172. https://doi.org/10.15294/pandecta.vol19i1.1046
Hiariej, E. O. S. (2021). Prinsip-prinsip hukum pidana (Edisi revisi). Cahaya Atma Pustaka.
Hoesada, J. (2021). Hukum pendidikan Indonesia: Bunga rampai pemikiran. Salemba Humanika.
Kementerian Pendidikan, Kebudayaan, Riset, dan Teknologi. (2022). Panduan pembelajaran dan asesmen Kurikulum Merdeka.
Marzuki, P. M. (2021). Penelitian hukum (Edisi revisi). Prenadamedia Group.
Moeljatno. (2021). Asas-asas hukum pidana. Rineka Cipta.
Muladi. (2018). Hak asasi manusia, politik dan sistem peradilan pidana. Badan Penerbit Universitas Diponegoro.
Otto, J. M. (2003). Kepastian hukum di Indonesia. Citra Aditya Bakti.
Pantouw, D. A. D. (2020). Hak mendisiplinkan (tuchtrecht) oleh guru terhadap murid dalam sistem hukum pidana Indonesia. Lex Crimen, 9(3).
Pratama, P. A., Budoyo, S., & Maretasari, D. A. (2025). Perlindungan hukum bagi guru dalam menjalankan tugas profesionalnya terkait dengan penerapan punishment untuk mendisiplinkan siswa. Jurnal Inovasi Pembelajaran di Sekolah, 6(1), 41–50. https://doi.org/10.51874/jips.v6i1.309
Rahardjo, S. (2009). Masalah penegakan hukum: Suatu tinjauan sosiologis. Sinar Baru.
Rawls, J. (1971). A theory of justice. Harvard University Press.
Saleh, R. (2019). Perbuatan pidana dan pertanggungjawaban pidana: Dua pengertian dasar dalam hukum pidana. Aksara Baru.
Soekanto, S. (2014). Faktor-faktor yang mempengaruhi penegakan hukum. RajaGrafindo Persada.
Soekanto, S. (2022). Pengantar penelitian hukum. UI Press.
Sudibyo, A., & Kiyamudin, E. (2019). Perlindungan hukum terhadap guru dalam melaksanakan tugas keprofesionalannya dikaitkan dengan punishment dalam mendisiplinkan siswa. Journal Presumption of Law, 1(2). https://doi.org/10.31949/jpl.v1i2.89