Effectiveness of Charging Criminal Court Costs on The Implementation of Criminal Cases Based on Article 222 of the KUHAP

Abstract

This study investigates the effectiveness of charging court costs in criminal cases as regulated in Article 222 of the Indonesian Criminal Procedure Code (KUHAP). It aims to examine the role of court cost imposition in ensuring the effective implementation of criminal case decisions and the implications for justice and judicial efficiency. Using a normative-juridical approach and qualitative descriptive analysis, the research relies on library research methods, including the review of statutory regulations, legal doctrines, and relevant case decisions. The findings reveal that while the imposition of court costs is a mandatory component of criminal verdicts, its practical enforcement often encounters various challenges. In many cases, defendants do not immediately fulfill their obligation to pay, either due to financial incapacity or unwillingness. The absence of a standardized mechanism to assess a defendant’s ability to pay adds further complexity to the execution process. This study emphasizes the need for a clearer and more consistent legal framework that enables the verification of a defendant’s financial status. When a defendant is genuinely unable to pay, the burden may be shifted to the state in order to ensure access to justice and prevent undue penal consequences. However, if the defendant is financially capable yet refuses to comply, law enforcement authorities may impose execution delays or use procedural means to compel payment, which in turn may impact the execution of the sentence. Ultimately, the study underscores the importance of enforcing court cost obligations to uphold both justice and procedural effectiveness in the administration of criminal law