General Court Decisions in Handling Criminal Cases Violating Article 78 of Law No. 31 of 2004 Result in Legal Nullity at the District Court, High Court, and Supreme Court (Case Study: Cirebon District Court)

Abstract

Fisheries crimes are generally handled in District Courts designated as Fisheries Courts with the following composition of judges: two career judges and one ad hoc judge, based on Article 78 of Law No. 31 of 2004 concerning Fisheries. However, some fisheries crimes are handled by District Courts that do not have fisheries courts. Meanwhile, the transitional provisions of Article 106 allow cases to be handled outside the jurisdiction of fisheries courts. The transitional period has exceeded three years since the enactment of the law, so that the validity of judges' decisions in cases heard by three career judges at the District Court, High Court, and Supreme Court has become null and void. The establishment of fisheries courts has not been evenly distributed in areas where fisheries crimes often occur, and there is still a lack of readiness in terms of ad hoc judges with expertise in fisheries. Of the 33 provinces, there are only 10 fisheries courts, which is detrimental to the Indonesian economy and local fishermen. The Indonesian government does not seem to be serious in dealing with fisheries crimes that are often committed by foreign parties, thereby harming the Indonesian state.