Enhancing the criminology of mobility: A need for interdisciplinary and multi-sited research approaches. Introduction

Ultimum remedium is one of the principles contained in Indonesian criminal law which says that criminal law should be made a final effort in the case of law enforcement. However, law enforcement through the criminal justice system is currently still dominated by the positivism mindset, a way of (criminal) law enforcement which is only based on laws and regulations. In many cases, Criminal Law is used as the only way of order. The purpose of this research is to describe the concept of Ultimum remedium in criminal law, criminal law enforcement practices in Indonesia, and criminal law enforcement concepts in the progressive law paradigm. This research used a philosophical approach discussing law enforcement idealism in the future. The data used were the qualitatively analyzed secondary data. The research results showed that the Ultimum remedium principle has not been completely implemented in law enforcement. Consequently, the burden for crime settlements got bigger and made the law enforcers busier. The Ultimum remedium principle is supported by various considering bases or grounds from the constitutional law aspect, political science, criminal law, and humanism consideration or human rights. Law enforcement in Indonesia was viewed as stagnant and discriminative law enforcement. It was illustrated as a spider web that can only trap the weak but will be easily torn by the rich and strong. Factors inhibiting law enforcement in Indonesia include weak political will and political action of the state leaders to make law as the commander. The regulations and laws reflect the political interests of authorities more than those of the society. Thus, criminal law enforcement is greatly necessary for the progressive law paradigm. Progressivity is greatly required in law enforcement. Progressive law departs from the humanistic perspective. Thinking progressively means having the courage to get out from the law absolutism thinking mainstream and positioning law in the relative position located in the entire humanistic problems.

Law Enforcement is essentially the upholding of ideas or concepts as well as an effort to realize the ideas of people's expectations to become reality. Law enforcement against criminal acts of abuse of residence permit in the immigration environment is carried out by the Civil Servant Investigator. In enforcing the law against perpetrators of misuse of residence permits, Civil Servants of immigration can coordinate with domestic law enforcement agencies, namely the Indonesian National Police, prosecutors and judges. The reality in the field often results in problems in the criminal investigation process carried out by the National Police and Civil Servant Investigators (PPNS) always experiencing ups and downs. The ups and downs can take the form of an incomplete investigation or an incomplete investigation such as the completion of a filing. Many cases of abuse of residence permit only go to the stage of administrative action. Enforcement of criminal law against illegal immigrants entering and entering Indonesian territory without going through immigration checks, namely that in resolving cases or law enforcement criminal acts against illegal immigrants entering and entering Indonesian territory are carried out in two ways namely administrative immigration actions (outside the criminal justice system) and actions projustitia (justice process) included in the criminal justice system (Criminal Justice System).

In recent years, a strand of criminology explicitly concerned with “green” or natural environmental issues has emerged, aiming to place a primary emphasis on the matter of harms and crimes affecting the environment and the planet, and addressing issues such as climate change; natural resource extraction and exploitation; pollution of air, land, and water; biodiversity loss; and wildlife trafficking. The case has been made for a “green perspective” within criminology—an approach that seeks neither to propose a definitive theory with respect to the causes of environmental crime or harm nor to offer a specific set of solutions, but more modestly sets forth an argument that criminology should be more sensitive to the extent and implications of these urgent and globally important matters. Arguably, this orientation for criminology reflects the times and in that sense there is a degree of inevitability about its arrival from the early 1990s onward. The development of a “green criminology” has led to an international community of common interest concerned with the biophysical and socioeconomic consequences of various sources of threat and damage to the environment. Major themes, topics, and problems that have been examined include pollution and its regulation; corporate criminality and its impact on the environment; health and safety in the workplace where breaches of regulations and law have environmentally damaging consequences; the involvement of organized crime and official corruption in the illegal disposal of toxic waste; the impact and legacy of law enforcement and military operations on air quality, landscapes, water supply, and living organisms inhabiting these areas; as well as forms of regulation, law enforcement, and prosecution relevant to such acts and omissions. Green criminological research, as it has developed, covers environmental damage and destruction (both as proscribed by law and defined as “crimes” and those harms that are not); environmental laws (i.e., administrative, criminal, and civil, applied via a governmental agency or the criminal justice system, and including enforcement measures and court proceedings, prosecution, and sentencing); and environmental regulation (e.g., systems and processes for purposes of protection and monitoring). As recognized in the natural sciences and most policy circles, the resources of the Earth are finite and this has implications that criminology is well-placed to examine in cases where problems such as abuse, conflict, corruption, exploitation, law-breaking, rule-avoidance, manslaughter, and murder can all be identified. In this article, we note (1) General Introductions and Overviews; (2) Early Contributions and Developments; (3) Conceptualizations and Alternative Formulations; (4) Topics of Study in Green Criminology; (5) Responses to Environmental Harm (2000–2005) and (2006–2011); and (6) Future Directions.

This study aims to analyze law enforcement in the criminal justice system based on the value of restorative justice. The problem is the approach used in criminal law enforcement is mostly still giving a deterrent effect and conventionally imposing the law itself. The ideal law enforcement has to be supported by awareness of the role of punishment as a social sub-system, community’s influence is quite significant in efforts to enforce the law. The efforts to develop law enforcement with the concept of restorative justice are the ones that are directed at reforming criminal law in Indonesia. This research was conducted to identify how restorative justice is regulated in law enforcement that is centered on recovering the crime victims from the losses and suffering they undergo. This is interesting to study through the concept of restorative justice-based law enforcement. The research method is normative jurisdiction with the approach of the rule of law and the concept approach. The results of the research show that restorative justice has not been maximally used as a basis for consideration and a center for law enforcement because it focuses more on retaliation for criminals over the crimes they have committed. The value of restorative justice is specifically limited to the punishment of children, which is regulated in Act Number 11 of 2012 concerning the Criminal Justice System for Children. In other words, the law enforcement has not been satisfying because one of its objectives is recovery of victims. Keywords: Law Enforcement, Restorative Justice, Criminal Law DOI : 10.7176/JLPG/92-04 Publication date: December 31 st 2019

The criminal justice system should be an embodiment of values of Pancasila. Few cases raised concerns and questioned Pancasila’s practice because it hurt community justice sense. Pancasila must be reflected in criminal law enforcement. The criminal justice system is open whose operation is influenced by the environment the subsystems's operation, it is very important to be studied comprehensively. This article discusses the Indonesian criminal justice system with a Pancasila perspective; Indonesian criminal justice system with the concept of Pancasila as an open criminal justice system; subsystem in the Indonesian criminal justice system has the concept of Pancasila as an open criminal justice system. The research method in this article is normative with philosophy approach. The results showed that criminal justice system has Pancasila perspective, means that it must prioritize humanity, the balance of the interests of perpetrators and victims, the justice of God, humanity and society (substantive justice). As an open system, it does not work in solitaire in a vacuum, but must pay attention to legal values and community justice sense so that the working of it is more contextual in applying criminal law to achieve its success. And all subsystems in the criminal justice system have basically been based on Pancasila as an open justice system.

The criminal justice system should be an embodiment of values of Pancasila. Few cases raised concerns and questioned Pancasila’s practice because it hurt community justice sense. Pancasila must be reflected in criminal law enforcement. The criminal justice system is open whose operation is influenced by the environment the subsystems's operation, it is very important to be studied comprehensively. This article discusses the Indonesian criminal justice system with a Pancasila perspective; Indonesian criminal justice system with the concept of Pancasila as an open criminal justice system; subsystem in the Indonesian criminal justice system has the concept of Pancasila as an open criminal justice system. The research method in this article is normative with philosophy approach. The results showed that criminal justice system has Pancasila perspective, means that it must prioritize humanity, the balance of the interests of perpetrators and victims, the justice of God, humanity and society (substantive justice). As an open system, it does not work in solitaire in a vacuum, but must pay attention to legal values and community justice sense so that the working of it is more contextual in applying criminal law to achieve its success. And all subsystems in the criminal justice system have basically been based on Pancasila as an open justice system.

Violations of the criminal provisions in the election law give birth to election crimes. For the occurrence of election crimes, the state is obliged to carry out law enforcement efforts. Law enforcement against election crimes is carried out by legal apparatus authorized by the election law, namely the integrated law enforcement center (gakumdu). The integrated law enforcement center consists of the election supervisory body (Bawaslu), the police, and the prosecutor’s office. Election law enforcement is very important, especially in terms of the handling, investigation, prosecution, judicial, and sentencing processes. The law enforcement process is always identical to the current criminal justice system. In law enforcement for election crimes, the characteristics of law enforcement are different from criminal law enforcement in general. The methodology used in this paper uses a descriptive juridical method.
 Keywords: criminal justice system, election crime, integrated law enforcement center

Criminal justice system as a tool of law enforcement, didn't work optimally in Indonesia. It often being used by executive power because its position and function didn't independent and subordinated by executive power. Judicial power is an independent power, but other subsistem in CJS such as investigative power, prosecution power, and Executors power structurally and functionally are under executive power, and as result that their roles as a power instrument to service power's interest. This research purpose to set ideal format in integrated CJS working , to manifest judicial power in the independency and integrated criminal law enforcement through reconstruction and reorientation of criminal justice system construction, substantial and cultural. Main object in this research is criminal law enforcement policy, juridical normative and sociological approach, primary and secondary data as a main data to qualitative analyzing. The result of this research show that function of subsystem in criminal justice system (such as investigation, prosecution, and execution power ) have not show independent yet, cause of under the executive power. Anyway judicial power is set as independent power out of executive power, in organizationing, budgeting, staffing, and carrier system under one roof system that subordinated by Supreme Court . Here CJS is unsystemic but partially and fragmentair. This situation result subsytem rivality and in the end can be barrier in CJS performances. There is policy measures to implement integrally of independency criminal justice system by systemic approach to reset related policy in the law substance, the law structure and the law culture. Keywords : reconstruction, criminal justice system, independency and judicial power.

This study shows a comprehensive evaluation of the Philippine Coast Guard (PCG) personnel's competencies in enforcing maritime criminal laws. Anchored in the context of the Philippines' complex maritime environment, the research highlighted the pivotal role of the PCG in safeguarding maritime security, safety, and environmental protection through effective law enforcement. Employing mixed methods, the study used interviews and survey questionnaire among PCG personnel. The findings revealed significant gaps in knowledge and skills among PCG personnel, particularly in the application of specific criminal laws and procedures relevant to maritime law enforcement. It was observed that while personnel possessed basic knowledge of laws, there were inconsistencies in their ability to apply this knowledge effectively during law enforcement operations. Additionally, the study identified a strong correlation between the level of education, training, and the competency levels of the respondents, suggesting that continuous professional development and targeted training programs are crucial for enhancing the PCG’s operational effectiveness. The study underscored the need for a structured and comprehensive training program tailored to address the identified competency gaps. The program is essential for enhancing capabilities for maritime criminal laws enforcement. The research advocated for the integration of theoretical knowledge with practical application through continuous education and training, emphasizing the importance of developing a skilled workforce capable of adapting to the challenges of maritime law enforcement. The findings serve as a strategic guide for the PCG to enhance personnel management, operational efficiency, and stakeholder trust, ultimately contributing to the nation's maritime security framework.

The 1945 Constitution of the State of the Republic of Indonesia Year 1945 confirms that Indonesia is a country of law. The one important principle of state of law is the guarantee of the implementation of independent judicial power, free from the influence of other powers to organize judiciary to enforce the law and justice. This study is based on the curiosity of investigators in uncovering the scope and existence of judicial power in Indonesia. The scope and existence were restricted to two state institutions in the field of the judiciary, the Supreme Court (SC) and the Constitutional Court (CC). Therefore, this study aims to identify and analyze the comparison (similarities and differences) between the authority of the SC and the CC. This study views of its kind is a normative legal research. While the views of nature, descriptive study. SC and the CC have the same authority to be a court decision that is both first and last. SC and the CC provides access to people who can not afford as the recipient of legal aid to be able to act. SC have jurisdiction in the enforcement of the criminal law, while the CC, does not have jurisdiction in the enforcement of the criminal law, but the CC decision related to the decriminalization of significant influence in the enforcement of criminal law. SC and the CC differ in their patterns and the supervision of the Chief Justice of the Constitutional Court. SC and the CC different in terms of a court decision is final and binding. The SC decision, are not the first and last because is final and binding and there is also not final but is already binding. There are differences of transparency in the legislation review in the SC and the CC. Keywords: The Rule of Law, Attribution Power, Judicial Power, Justice.

Biometric technical capabilities enable the collection, storage, transmission, sharing, matching, and analysis of biometrics to enable decision making and actioning in support of national security objectives. United Nations Security Council Resolution (UNSCR) 2396 (2017) and UNSCR 2322 (2016) calls upon member states to investigate foreign terrorist fighters and share biometrics and contextual information, which requires a close alignment between military operations, border security, and law enforcement investigations. A system of systems design of biometrics technical capabilities allows for closer alignment between relevant entities to support national security objectives. However, this alone is not sufficient and there is a need for legislation and organizational policy to enable national and international biometrics collection, storage, transmission, sharing, matching, analysis and actioning. This paper discusses the complex Australian legislative and policy considerations to enable the biometric system to support the criminal justice, law enforcement, military and intelligence systems to meet national security objectives. Sharing of biometrics data and contextual information to meet national security objectives need to be balanced with privacy concerns and civil liberty.

Justice in the criminal justice system is a static and dynamic in accordance with the space, time and conditions of criminal acts, justice has legal aspects in criminal justice. Understanding justice in the criminal justice system will be found differences in justice that are relatively in accordance with criminal acts and the consequences of these criminal acts. The clean and authoritative administration of justice is the ideals of the judiciary in Indonesia and the hope of seeking justice, the face of the judiciary forms a fair criminal justice system if under ideal conditions, sometimes the criminal justice system does not escape the pressures of the interests of those who want to polarize the law in accordance with a sense of justice constructed by law enforcement as a sub-system of the judiciary body. Normative law enforcement is a series of actions to maintain material law that has been violated by legal subjects in general, law enforcement in the criminal justice system has unique characteristics and procedures in accordance with the legal system adopted and continuously shifts in balance through a renewed legal system . Relevant issues to be examined are: What is the basic idea of a fair trial, How to approach the control of the criminal justice system as an alternative to distributing justice. This study uses a constructivist paradigm with Non-Doctrinal Approach Method or socio-legal research with Qualitative methods, the research specifications are using analytical descriptive, the main data types in this study are field data and are supported by library data, data analysis methods are using Juridical-Qualitative data. For field data validation using interview and observation techniques. The results of the research and discussion in this study are in accordance with the problems that were the focus of the study found the following matters: First, the lack of harmony between the legal system and the criminal law enforcement system has an impact on the basic idea of the criminal justice system. Second, control in the criminal justice system is part of the transformation and reform of the legal system in the criminal justice system.

This study identified characteristics and experiences of arrestees and jail inmates with a serious mental illness that were associated with misdemeanor and felony arrests and additional days in jail. County and statewide criminal justice records and health and social service archival data sets were used to identify inmates with serious mental illness who were in the Pinellas County, Florida, jail between July 1, 2003, and June 30, 2004, and their health and social service contacts from July 1, 2002, to June 10, 2006. Criminal justice and mental health services were recorded longitudinally across 16 quarters, or 90-day periods. Generalized estimating equations for count data were used to describe the associations between individual characteristics and experiences and the risks of misdemeanor and felony arrests and additional days in jail. A total of 3,769 jail inmates (10.1% of all jail inmates) were diagnosed as having a serious mental illness. Participants experienced a mean+/-SD of .90+/-.60 arrest for every three quarters and 10.9+/-23.6 days in jail per quarter that they resided in the county. Being male, being homeless, not having outpatient mental health treatment, and having an involuntary psychiatric evaluation in the previous quarter were independently associated with significantly increased odds of misdemeanor arrests and additional days in jail. On the other hand, being black, being younger than 21 years, having a nonpsychotic diagnosis, and a co-occurring substance use disorder diagnosis were all independently associated with significantly increased odds of felony arrests, and with the exception of having a nonpsychotic diagnosis, they were also significantly associated with additional days in jail. Findings suggest that there are subgroups of individuals with a serious mental illness in the criminal justice system that may require different policy and programmatic responses.

This paper presents an analysis of and recommendations for improving the relationship between the mental health and criminal justice systems in Charlottesville and Albemarle County, Virginia. The project team used data analysis, detailed process modeling, and stakeholder discussions to identify three major problems in the current system for managing the needs of people with mental illness, also referred to as consumers. First, encounters between consumers and law enforcement or mental health personnel resulted in unnecessary safety risks. Second, the limited resources of both the criminal justice and mental health systems were consumed from ineffective responses to consumers' needs. Third, when an individual with mental illness moved from one agency to another, they often experienced gaps in treatment which caused a crisis situation to develop, requiring police involvement. To address these problems, the project team recommends that the city and county re-align their existing resources into a collaborative crisis intervention system (CIS). The CIS would seek to improve the coordination between agencies in the criminal justice and mental health systems; it would be able to handle both the acute needs of consumers in crisis and minimize the potential for crisis situations to develop by providing long-term stability. In addition to using these systems' limited resources effectively and efficiently, the development of a CIS would enhance the quality of life for the region's consumers and benefit the community as a whole. This project was conducted by University of Virginia students as an evaluation team for the crisis intervention team (CIT) taskforce, a diverse group of local representatives from both the mental health and criminal justice systems who are advocates for improving the relationship between the systems.

Governing Immigration Through Crime: A Reader. By Julie A. Dowling and Jonathan Xavier Inda. Stanford University Press, 2013. 320 pp. $29.95 paperback.In Governing Immigration Through Crime, Julie A. Dowling and Jonathan Xavier Inda present an important collection of essays examining different ways in which the lines between immigration control and criminal law enforcement in the United States blurred over the past two decades. As they explain in their introduction, the volume considers how unauthorized migrants have been constructed as subjects who harm the well-being of American citizens and examines a resulting set of practices that criminalized unauthorized (pp. 2, 28). Crime and punishment, they argue, have become the preferred means for the undocumented, thereby rendering unauthorized migrants increasingly subject to regulation and police measures (p. 28).The volume includes abridged versions of previously published essays by scholars of anthropology, communications, criminology, ethnic studies, law, political science, sociology and urban planning. These contributions are organized into five thematic sections, each introduced by an editors' preface offering context and suggestions for additional reading. The first set of chapters lays out overarching legal and conceptual perspectives on the apparent convergence between the norms and practices of immigration regulation, criminal law, and (especially since 2001) national security. The next three sections examine this convergence vis-a-vis three categories of immigration control developments: the fortification of the U.S.-Mexico border, the expansion of interior immigration enforcement, and the resulting emergence of a regime of mass deportation and immigration detention. The overall tenor of the volume is decidedly critical of these trends. While all of these initiatives continue to garner considerable political support-and technology has enabled the efficient development of more pervasive forms of immigration control and surveillance (Kalhan 2014)-the volume does not include any contributions that seek to justify or embrace these developments. The final section highlights the sometimes neglected ways in which unauthorized migrants and their allies actively protested, challenged, and resisted this increasingly punitive immigration control regime.Given the editors' framing, it might seem ironic that the volume addresses only in passing the most direct manifestation of what it might mean, on their terms, to govern immigration through crime-namely, the direct use of criminal institutions as mechanisms of immigration control. As Dowling and Inda observe (pp. 16-17), the number of federal criminal prosecutions for migration-related offenses has skyrocketed in recent years, and as a result, federal prosecutors now bring criminal charges for more migration-related offenses than all other categories of combined (Meissner et al. 2013: 93-94). In addition, some states and localities now aggressively prosecute criminal laws, such as human trafficking and identity theft offenses, in a manner motivated by immigration control objectives or that targets conduct associated with migration (Eagly 2010).However, while Dowling and Inda conceptualize governing immigration through as involving practices that make and the institutional context in which efforts to guide the conduct of immigrants take place (p. 2), the volume does not narrowly address crime or punishment as formal legal categories. Rather, the collection aims to highlight more broadly the various ways in which immigration control practices increasingly draw on norms and mechanisms traditionally associated with the criminal law. Indeed, with the volume's title, Dowling and Inda self-consciously echo the work of Jonathan Simon, who has explained how political actors utilized the category of to legitimate interventions that other motivations in a variety of domains and how, as a result, the technologies, discourses, and metaphors of and criminal justice been prominently deployed to address social problems across an ever-widening array of institutional settings (Simon 2007: 4-5). …