Double Track and Anti-SLAPP: Indonesian Judicial Reasoning in Environmental Cases

Deo Renaldi Saputra; Ali Mashyar; Cahya Wulandari; Sunusi Dauda; Yusril Ihza Mahendra

doi:10.21580/walrev.2026.8.1.31669

Authors

Deo Renaldi Saputra Universitas Negeri Semarang, Indonesia
Ali Mashyar Universitas Negeri Semarang, Indonesia https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2317-7517
Cahya Wulandari Universitas Negeri Semarang, Indonesia
Sunusi Dauda Bayero University Kano, Nigeria https://orcid.org/0009-0005-0858-4180
Yusril Ihza Mahendra Ryazan Medical State I.P Pavlov University, Russian Federation

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.21580/walrev.2026.8.1.31669

Abstract

Abstract: This study examines the application of the double track system and the anti-SLAPP principle in Indonesian criminal law, with a focus on Decision Number 374/Pid.Sus/2024/PT SMG. The research addresses two questions: how the double track system operates in cases involving environmental defenders, and to what extent the anti-SLAPP principle influences judicial reasoning. A normative juridical approach is employed using statutory, conceptual, and case-based analysis of relevant legal instruments, doctrines, and court decisions. The findings show that the court may acknowledge the formal fulfillment of criminal elements while refraining from imposing punishment when the act is closely linked to environmental advocacy and public interest. The integration of the double-track system and the anti-SLAPP principle supports a more proportional and context-sensitive approach to criminal adjudication. The case analysis also reveals limitations, including the absence of clear procedural standards and the risk of inconsistent application across similar cases. Additionally, the protection of environmental defenders is not absolute and must be balanced with the rights of affected individuals. This study proposes a more structured integration of both principles to strengthen legal certainty, ensure proportionality, and support the protection of environmental defenders within a balanced framework of criminal justice.

Studi ini meneliti penerapan sistem jalur ganda dan prinsip anti-SLAPP dalam hukum pidana Indonesia, dengan fokus pada Keputusan Nomor 374/Pid.Sus/2024/PT SMG. Penelitian ini membahas dua pertanyaan: bagaimana sistem jalur ganda beroperasi dalam kasus-kasus yang melibatkan pembela lingkungan, dan sejauh mana prinsip anti-SLAPP memengaruhi penalaran yudisial. Pendekatan yuridis normatif digunakan dengan menggunakan analisis hukum, konseptual, dan berbasis kasus dari instrumen hukum, doktrin, dan keputusan pengadilan yang relevan. Temuan menunjukkan bahwa pengadilan dapat mengakui pemenuhan formal unsur-unsur pidana sambil menahan diri dari menjatuhkan hukuman ketika tindakan tersebut terkait erat dengan advokasi lingkungan dan kepentingan umum. Integrasi sistem jalur ganda dan prinsip anti-SLAPP mendukung pendekatan yang lebih proporsional dan peka konteks terhadap peradilan pidana. Analisis kasus juga mengungkapkan keterbatasan, termasuk tidak adanya standar prosedural yang jelas dan risiko penerapan yang tidak konsisten di berbagai kasus serupa. Selain itu, perlindungan pembela lingkungan tidak bersifat mutlak dan harus diseimbangkan dengan hak-hak individu yang terdampak. Studi ini mengusulkan integrasi yang lebih terstruktur dari kedua prinsip tersebut untuk memperkuat kepastian hukum, memastikan proporsionalitas, dan mendukung perlindungan para pembela lingkungan dalam kerangka peradilan pidana yang seimbang.

Keywords: Environmental Defender; Double Track System; Anti-SLAPP; Criminal Sanction; Judicial Decision.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Albert, A., T. Bain, E. Brico, B. M. Dinkins, K. Houston, J. McMillan, and V. Quarles. 2021. Ending the Family Death Penalty and Building a World We Deserve. https://doi.org/10.7916/hchn-1120.

Ancel, M. 1998. Social Defence: A Modern Approach to Criminal Problems. Vol. 199. London: Psychology Press.

Ardinata, M. 2020. “Tanggung Jawab Negara terhadap Jaminan Kesehatan dalam Perspektif Hak Asasi Manusia.” Jurnal HAM 11(2):319–332. http://dx.doi.org/10.30641/ham.2020.11.319-332.

Berg, M. T., and C. J. Schreck. 2022. “The Meaning of the Victim–Offender Overlap for Criminological Theory and Crime Prevention Policy.” Annual Review of Criminology 5(1):277–297. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-criminol-030920-120724.

Bogdanova, I. 2022. Unilateral Sanctions in International Law and the Enforcement of Human Rights: The Impact of the Principle of Common Concern of Humankind. Vol. 9. Leiden: Brill.

Bronsther, J. 2021. “The Corrective Justice Theory of Punishment.” Virginia Law Review 107(2):227–279. https://www.jstor.org/stable/27135576.

Dhiaulhaq, A. 2024. “Judges’ Considerations in SLAPP Cases against Environmental Human Rights Defenders in Indonesia: A Precedent-Based Overview.” Leks&Co Law Firm. https://blog.lekslawyer.com/judges-considerations-in-slapp-cases-against-environmental-human-rights-defender-in-indonesia-a-precedent-based-overview/.

Epps, D. 2021. “Checks and Balances in the Criminal Law.” Vanderbilt Law Review 74:1–55.

Glicksman, R. L., and R. E. Levy. 2022. “The New Separation of Powers Formalism and Administrative Adjudication.” George Washington Law Review 90:1088–1148. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362480621105631.

Heath-Kelly, C., and Š. Shanaáh. 2022. “The Long History of Prevention: Social Defence, Security and Anticipating Future Crimes in the Era of Penal Welfarism.” Theoretical Criminology 26(3):357–376. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362480621105631.

Heider, F. 2013. The Psychology of Interpersonal Relations. London: Psychology Press.

Kärner, M. 2022. “Interplay between European Union Criminal Law and Administrative Sanctions: Constituent Elements of Transposing Punitive Administrative Sanctions into National Law.” New Journal of European Criminal Law 13(1):42–68. https://doi.org/10.1177/20322844221085918.

Khan, A., and M. A. H. S. Jiliani. 2023. “Expanding the Boundaries of Jurisprudence in the Era of Technological Advancements.” IIUMLJ 31:393–410.

Kurniawan, I. D. 2023. “The Meaning of the Principle of Material Legality in the Reform of Indonesian Criminal Law.” IJOLARES: Indonesian Journal of Law Research 1(2):37–40. https://doi.org/10.60153/ijolares.v1i2.22.

Pifferi, M. 2024. “The Historical Origins and Evolution of Rehabilitative Punishment.” Crime and Justice 53(1):103–160. https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/abs/10.1086/733432.

Prakoso, A. 2023. “Menelaah Putusan Aktivis Lingkungan Daniel Frits.” Mahkamah Agung Republik Indonesia – Marinews. https://marinews.mahkamahagung.go.id/berita/menelaah-putusan-aktivis-lingkungan-daniel-frits-0bs.

Pratama, H. Y., et al. 2024. “Digital Environmental Activism and the Challenges of Criminalization: A Case Study of Daniel Frits in the Karimunjawa Issue.” E-Journal of Media and Society (E-JoMS) 7(4):38–59. https://ir.uitm.edu.my/id/eprint/123558/.

Putra, H. M., and H. Ahyani. 2022. “Internalization in Islamic Law Progressive in Criminal Law Changes in Indonesia.” Jurnal Ilmiah Al-Syir'ah 20(1):68–90. http://dx.doi.org/10.30984/jis.v20i1.1861.

Rachmawaty, R., M. M. Gunawan, and N. Nurviani. 2024. “Judicial Perspectives on the Equitable Resolution of Anti-SLAPP Cases: Insights from Indonesia.” Journal of Law, Environmental and Justice 2(1):18–41. https://doi.org/10.62264/jlej.v2i1.88.

Ramada, D. P., U. Kamal, and I. S. Utari. 2025. “Environmental Criminal Law as a Tool for Ecological Protection: Interpreting the Constitution in the Context of Environmental Crimes.” Semarang State University Undergraduate Law and Society Review 5(2):1013–1056. https://doi.org/10.15294/lsr.v5i2.30327.

Rohman, T. 2023. Pemidanaan Model Double Track System bagi Korporasi dalam Tindak Pidana Lingkungan Hidup. Disertasi, Universitas Bhayangkara Surabaya.

Saputra, A. W. 2023. “The Status of Indonesian Environmental Defenders 2014–2023: Threats Increasing, Time for State Action.” Auriga Nusantara. https://auriga.or.id/press_release/detail/50/the-status-of-indonesian-environmental-defenders-2014-2023-threats-increasing-time-for-state-action.

Sitompul, M. N., and A. Sitompul. 2022. “Execution of Death Penalty in Narcotics Crime in the Perspective of National Law in Indonesia.” International Asia of Law and Money Laundering (IAML) 1(2):107–112. https://doi.org/10.59712/iaml.v1i2.19.

Yisheng, Y. 2025. “Balance Theory.” Pp. 123–124 in The ECPH Encyclopedia of Psychology. Singapore: Springer Nature Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-97-7874-4_170.

Yusa, I. G., and B. Hermanto. 2018. “Implementasi Green Constitution di Indonesia: Jaminan Hak Konstitusional Pembangunan Lingkungan Hidup Berkelanjutan.” Jurnal Konstitusi 15(2):306–326.