Abstrak

Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk menganalisis penegakan hukum pidana terhadap dokumen palsu dalam proses permohonan paspor di Kantor Imigrasi Kelas II Tarakan, dengan fokus pada kesenjangan antara aturan normatif (das Sollen) dan praktik di lapangan (das Sein), serta mengevaluasi efektivitas penerapan sanksi administratif dibandingkan sanksi pidana. Metode penelitian yang digunakan adalah empiris dengan pengumpulan data melalui wawancara, observasi, dan studi dokumen. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa Kantor Imigrasi memilih menggunakan pendekatan administratif, seperti penangguhan paspor daripada pendekatan pidana yang disebabkan oleh faktor kemanusiaan. Namun, penerapan sanksi administratif dianggap kurang efektif dalam memberikan efek jera, sebagaimana terlihat dari jumlah kasus pelanggaran. Kantor Imigrasi Tarakan belum menjadikan hukum pidana sebagai primum remedium, padahal pemalsuan dokumen adalah perbuatan yang dilarang dalam Pasal 264 KUHP dan Pasal 126 huruf (a) Undang-Undang Nomor 6 Tahun 2011 tentang Keimigrasian, yang dapat mengancam negara karena sering digunakan untuk aktivitas ilegal. Penelitian ini juga mengidentifikasi permasalahan hukum, seperti pengalihan sanksi pidana menjadi administratif untuk menghindari proses hukum, serta kurangnya prosedur tegas oleh penyidik. Selain itu, lemahnya koordinasi antara Kantor Imigrasi dan lembaga penegakan hukum lainnya, serta penghindaran sanksi pidana karena proses pidananya memakan waktu dan biaya menjadi faktor penyebab utama. Penelitian ini menyarankan agar Kantor Imigrasi lebih mengoptimalkan primum remedium dalam penanganan dokumen palsu dengan memberikan prioritas pada penerapan sanksi pidana yang lebih tegas, serta memperkuat prosedur hukum dan koordinasi antara instansi penegak hukum.


Kata Kunci: Penegakan Hukum, Pemalsuan Dokumen, Primum Remedium, Sanksi Administratif, Kantor Imigrasi Tarakan

Abstract The purpose of this study is to examine the enforcement of criminal legislation in connection to the use of fraudulent documents in the passport application process at the Tarakan Class II Immigration Office. The study focuses on the disparity between normative regulations (das Sollen) and field practices (das Sein), as well as the effectiveness of administrative sanctions when compared to criminal penalties. The research method is empirical, with data collected via interviews, observations, and document studies. The findings reveal that the Immigration Office preferred administrative tactics, such as passport suspension, over criminal approaches due to humanitarian considerations. Nevertheless, the use of administrative sanctions is thought to be less effective in producing a deterrent impact, as evidenced by the number of violations. The Tarakan Immigration Office has not prioritized the enforcement of criminal law, despite the fact that using bogus paperwork is clearly forbidden by Article 264 of the Criminal Code and Article 126 letter (a) of Law Number 6 Year 2011 on Immigration. This is especially concerning because such operations frequently involve illegal acts, which can represent a substantial threat to national security. The study also revealed legal concerns including the lack of rigorous procedures by investigators and the distribution of criminal penalties into administrative ones meant to evade legal procedures. Moreover, major contributing reasons are the lack of efficient coordination between the Immigration Office and other law enforcement authorities as well as the avoidance of criminal penalties because of the lengthy and expensive character of criminal procedures. This study asserts that the Immigration Office should enhance the primary remedy for addressing counterfeit documents by prioritizing the implementation of stricter criminal penalties and by fortifying legal procedures and inter-agency collaboration among law enforcement entities. Keywords: law enforcement, false documents, primum remedium, administrative sanctions, Tarakan Immigration Office.