Criminal Liability and Ideal Procedural Legislation for Offenders With Mental and/or Intellectual Disabilities (A Comparative Study Between Indonesia and Japan)

Abstract

The criminal liability of offenders with mental and/or intellectual disabilities presents implementation challenges in Indonesian law (Articles 38 and 39 of the new Criminal Code) due to normative ambiguity and insufficient guidelines. In contrast, Japan provides a more systematic rehabilitation framework through Article 39 of its Penal Code and the Medical Treatment and Supervision Act (MTSA). This normative juridical research utilizes a comparative and conceptual approach. It analyzes primary, secondary, and tertiary legal materials, collected through comprehensive

literature study. The data is then qualitatively analyzed using a descriptive- comparative method to identify normative differences, similarities, and formulate ideal

legislative recommendations for Indonesia. The results indicate that main differences lie in the legislative framework and treatment protocols, with Japan's system being more structured For Indonesia, establishing an ideal procedural framework for offenders with mental and/or intellectual disabilities is crucial, emphasizing the increased involvement of forensic psychologists and psychiatrists, the development of comprehensive rehabilitation mechanisms, and the alignment with restorative justice and human rights principles to ensure legal protection, fairness, and social reintegration.