Addressing Legal Challenges: Implementing Nil Verdicts in Indonesia

Abstract

A zero verdict, or Nil Verdict, is a criminal sentence imposed when an individual has already received the maximum allowable sentence but must be retried due to specific circumstances, resulting in a sentence of zero or the maximum limit. This concept remains relatively unknown among the Indonesian public, raising questions about why judges do not impose additional penalties on individuals who have been legally proven guilty of a criminal offense. The Nil Verdict is explicitly outlined in the concept of concursus realis under Article 67 of the Criminal Code, which stipulates that a defendant sentenced to death should not face additional punishment even if new offenses are discovered later. This research employs a normative juridical method, analyzing legal regulations such as the Criminal Code and Circular Letter Number 1 of 2022, which pertains to the enforcement of the Supreme Court's plenary meeting resolutions. The findings indicate that Nil Verdicts are appropriate for defendants already sentenced to death, as seen in the cases of Muhammad Natsir and Heru Hidayat, and should apply to any subsequent cases without increasing the sentence beyond 20 years for previous convictions. However, issues persist with inadequate inter-court administrative integration, leading to overlapping criminal sanctions and sentences exceeding 20 years. The research underscores the need to review and refine the absorption principle in concursus realis and assess the relationship between legally binding and newly revealed crimes to ensure that Nil Verdicts align with the principles of legal certainty, justice, and practicality. This study aims to enhance public understanding of Nil Verdicts and their application.

Keywords

• concursus
• nullity verdict
• principle