What was the fate of AG after being named as the perpetrator of the persecution of D? 

What was the fate of AG after being named as the perpetrator of the persecution of D? 

The police have upgraded the status of AG (15) from being a witness to being the perpetrator of abuse against the child of GP Ansor officials with the initials D (17). 

This decision was conveyed by the General Crime Director of Polda Metro Jaya Kombes (Pol) Hengki Haryadi in a press conference which was held at the Polda Metro Jaya Headquarters, Thursday (2/3/2023). 

"There has been a change from AG's status, which initially was a child dealing with the law, increased in status to a child in conflict with the law or turned into a perpetrator," said Hengki. 

Even so, Hengki emphasized that AG could not be called a suspect because he was still underage. 

So what happened to AG after his status rose to become the perpetrator of the persecution? 

Will it be detained? 

Hengki did not say for certain whether AG would be detained after his status was promoted to perpetrator of the persecution. 

He only explained that the handling of AG must be in accordance with the rules regarding children in conflict with the law, which are regulated in the Child Protection Act (UU) and the Juvenile Justice Law. 

"There are formal rules that we must comply with, namely the mandate of the law. If we don't implement them, we are wrong," said Hengki when asked whether AG would be detained. 

On the same occasion, Child Criminal Law Expert at the Ministry of Women's Empowerment and Child Protection Ahmad Sofyan said that AG's detention should not have been carried out. 

"In order to avoid child detention, it should not even be done," said Sofyan in a press conference at the Metro Jaya Police Headquarters. 

According to Sofyan, the detention of children who are dealing with or in conflict with the law cannot be done haphazardly. 

There must be objective reasons owned by the police if they want to detain perpetrators of minors. 

"If this is done, there must be three objective reasons. First, running away, then being suspected of committing another crime, then destroying evidence," said Sofyan. 

"So the child protection law legally avoids detention of children who are in conflict with the law," he continued. 

Case background

As previously reported, the persecution took place in the Pesanggrahan area, South Jakarta, on 20 February 2023. 

Mario abused D because he heard news from the witness with the initials APA who stated that AG (15), his girlfriend, received bad treatment from the victim. 

Mario then told this to his friend, Shane Lukas (19). Later, Shane provoked Mario so that Mario abused the victim until he fell into a coma. 

Shane also recorded the abuse by Mario. Meanwhile, it is unclear what role AG played in this case. 

Shane and Mario have been named suspects and are being held in the Metro Jaya Police Headquarters detention room. 

Mario was charged with Article 354 of the Criminal Code paragraph 1, subsidiary to Article 354 paragraph 1 of the Criminal Code, subsidiary 353 paragraph 2 of the Criminal Code, subsidiary 351 paragraph 2 of the Criminal Code. 

Apart from that, investigators also charged Mario with Article 76c in conjunction with Article 80 of the Child Protection Act. 

"With a maximum threat of 12 years in prison for MDS," said Hengki. 

Meanwhile, Shane was charged with Article 355 paragraph 1 in conjunction with Article 56 of the Criminal Code, subsidiary 354 paragraph 1 in conjunction with 56 of the Criminal Code, subsidiary of Article 353 paragraph 2 in conjunction with 56 of the Criminal Code, subsidiary of Article 351 paragraph 2 in conjunction with 56 of the Criminal Code. 

"And or Article 76c juncto 80 of the Child Protection Act," explained Hengki. 

Meanwhile, AG was charged with Article 76c in conjunction with Article 80 of the Child Protection Act and/or Article 355 paragraph 1 in conjunction with Article 56 of the Criminal Code, a subsidiary of Article 354 paragraph 1 in conjunction with Article 56 of the Criminal Code, a subsidiary of Article 353 paragraph 2 in conjunction with Article 56 of the Criminal Code, a subsidiary of Article 351 paragraph 2 juncto Article 56 of the Criminal Code. 

Bagaimana Nasib AG Usai Ditetapkan sebagai Pelaku Penganiayaan D?

Polisi sudah menaikkan status AG (15) dari saksi menjadi pelaku penganiayaan terhadap anak pengurus GP Ansor berinisial D (17).

Keputusan itu disampaikan oleh Direktur Kriminal Umum Polda Metro Jaya Kombes (Pol) Hengki Haryadi dalam konferensi pers yang digelar di Mapolda Metro Jaya, Kamis (2/3/2023).

“Ada perubahan dari status AG yang awalnya adalah anak berhadapan dengan hukum, meningkat statusnya menjadi anak yang berkonflik dengan hukum atau berubah menjadi pelaku,” ujar Hengki.

Meski begitu, Hengki menegaskan bahwa AG tidak bisa disebut sebagai tersangka karena dia masih di bawah umur.

Lantas bagaimana nasib AG setelah statusnya naik menjadi pelaku penganiayaan?

Apakah akan ditahan?

Hengki tidak menjelaskan secara pasti apakah AG bakal ditahan setelah statusnya naik menjadi pelaku penganiayaan.

Dia hanya menjelaskan bahwa penanganan AG harus sesuai dengan aturan mengenai anak berkonflik dengan hukum, yang diatur dalam Undang-Undang (UU) Perlindungan Anak dan UU Peradilan Anak.

"Ada aturan secara formil yang memang harus kami taati, yaitu amanat dari undang-undang. Kalau kami tidak melaksanakan, kami salah," ujar Hengki saat ditanya apakah AG bakal ditahan.

Pada Kesempatan yang sama, Ahli Hukum Pidana Anak Kementerian Pemberdayaan Perempuan dan Perlindungan Anak Ahmad Sofyan mengatakan, penahanan terhadap AG tidak seharusnya dilakukan.

"Untuk penahanan anak dihindari, bahkan sebaiknya tidak dilakukan," tegas Sofyan dalam konferensi pers di Mapolda Metro Jaya.

Menurut Sofyan, penahanan terhadap anak yang berhadapan maupun berkonflik dengan hukum tidak bisa sembarangan dilakukan.

Harus ada alasan objektif yang dimiliki kepolisian jika ingin melakukan penahanan terhadap pelaku anak di bawah umur.

"Kalau dilakukan, harus ada tiga alasan objektif. Pertama melarikan diri, kemudian diduga melakukan tindak pidana lagi, kemudian merusak barang bukti," ungkap Sofyan.

"Jadi undang-undang perlindungan anak secara yuridis menghindari penahanan terhadap anak yang berhadapan dengan hukum," sambungnya.

Latar belakang kasus

Diberitakan sebelumnya, penganiayaan tersebut berlangsung di kawasan Pesanggrahan, Jakarta Selatan, pada 20 Februari 2023.

Mario menganiaya D karena mendengar kabar dari saksi berinisial APA yang menyebut AG (15), kekasihnya, mendapat perlakuan tidak baik dari korban.

Mario lalu menceritakan hal itu kepada temannya, Shane Lukas (19). Kemudian, Shane memprovokasi Mario sehingga Mario menganiaya korban sampai koma.

Shane juga merekam penganiayaan yang dilakukan Mario. Sementara itu, belum jelas peran yang dilakukan AG dalam kasus ini.

Shane dan Mario sudah ditetapkan sebagai tersangka dan ditahan di ruang tahanan Mapolda Metro Jaya.

Mario dijerat dengan Pasal 354 KUHP ayat 1, subsider Pasal 354 ayat 1 KUHP, subsider 353 ayat 2 KUHP, subsider 351 ayat 2 KUHP.

Selain itu, penyidik juga menjerat Mario dengan Pasal 76c juncto Pasal 80 Undang-Undang Perlindungan Anak.

"Dengan ancaman maksimal 12 tahun penjara untuk MDS," kata Hengki.

Sementara itu, Shane dijerat Pasal 355 ayat 1 juncto Pasal 56 KUHP, subsider 354 ayat 1 juncto 56 KUHP, subsider Pasal 353 ayat 2 juncto 56 KUHP, subsider Pasal 351 ayat 2 juncto 56 KUHP.

"Dan atau Pasal 76c juncto 80 Undang-Undang Perlindungan Anak," jelas Hengki.

Adapun AG dijerat dengan Pasal 76c juncto pasal 80 Undang-Undang Perlindungan Anak dan atau Pasal 355 ayat 1 juncto Pasal 56 KUHP, subsider Pasal 354 ayat 1 juncto Pasal 56 KUHP, subsider Pasal 353 ayat 2 juncto Pasal 56 KUHP, subsider Pasal 351 ayat 2 juncto Pasal 56 KUHP.