Özet:

To support women who are dealing with the legal system, especially women victims of gender-based violence, the Indonesian government issued Supreme Court Regulation (Perma) No. 3 of 2017 on Guidelines for Judging Cases of Women in Conflict with the Law. This regulation deals with women as victims, defendants and witnesses, and is used for civil and criminal cases. The Perma appears to attempt to counterbalance existing discriminatory practices in the courts and their processes. This article discusses the effectiveness of the “special treatment” in Supreme Court Regulation (Perma) No. 3 of 2017 on Guidelines for Judging Cases of Women in Conflict with the Law. This Perma seems to provide hope for producing progressive court decisions by contributing to the elimination of discrimination against women in the court process. However, this expectation certainly needs to be reviewed, given that, in their entirety, any such proceedings involve not only judges but also other law enforcement officials, namely the prosecutors. Furthermore, the presence of this Perma is considered by some Indonesian feminists to contradict the Judicial Code of Ethics and Guidelines for Judicial Behaviour (“the Code”). The Code requires judges to be neutral in judging but this Perma demands the opposite. This study is a qualitative study, and the data is obtained through a literature study of research conducted on court decisions and gender-based violence cases involving Indonesian women.

Anahtar Kelimeler: