Neurokriminologi dan Ilusi Kesengajaan: Mengapa Bukti Neurologis Tidak Dapat Menggantikan Mens Rea
Keywords:
Intention, Mens Rea, Neurology, NeurocriminologyAbstract
The use of neuroscience in criminal justice is increasingly gaining ground as a defense that claims the perpetrator's limited capacity for free will. However, uncritical acceptance of this biological argument has the potential to undermine the normative structure of criminal law, which makes intention a prerequisite for individual responsibility. This study aims to identify two main conceptual issues in the use of neurological evidence to prove mens rea: the epistemological limitations of neuroimaging technology and the legal system's vulnerability to reducing agency to biological data. This study analyzes both within the framework of modern criminal responsibility. The research method uses a qualitative approach with a conceptual approach. The results show that neuroscientific instruments lack the capacity to explain legal intention normatively, as they only produce correlational data irrelevant to the elements of will and consciousness. On the other hand, the dominance of the neurodeterminist approach erodes the principle of individual responsibility, shifting the perpetrator's position from a moral subject to an object of technical intervention. Therefore, the ontological boundary between the brain and the mind must be reaffirmed as a prerequisite for the sustainability of criminal acts based on agency and conscious choice.
References
Ahmad Syahir, Ahmadi Hasan & Masyithah Umar, Kepatuhan Terhadap Hukum (Sebuah Perspektif Filsafat Hukum), Indonesian Journal of Islamic Jurisprudence, Economic and Legal Theory, Vol. 1, No. 4, 2023, hlm. 930–944.
Anita S. Jwa & Russell A. Poldrack, The Spectrum of Data Sharing Policies in Neuroimaging Data Repositories, Human Brain Mapping, Vol. 43, No. 1, 2022, hlm. 2707–2721.
Chetan Sinha, Critical Psychology and the Brain: Rethinking Free Will in the Legal Context, Integrative Psychological and Behavioral Science, Vol. 58, No. 4, 2024, hlm. 1751–1768.
Clifford I. Workman, Keith J. Yoder & Jean Decety, The Dark Side of Morality – Neural Mechanisms Underpinning Moral Convictions and Support for Violence, AJOB Neuroscience, Vol. 11, No. 4, 2020, hlm. 269–284.
Colleen M. Berryessa, Federica Coppola & Gerardo Salvato, The Potential Effect of Neurobiological Evidence on the Adjudication of Criminal Responsibility of Psychopathic Defendants in Involuntary Manslaughter Cases, Psychology, Crime & Law, Vol. 27, No. 2, 2021, hlm. 140–158.
Damai Alan Saptama, Aime Renata Putri, Nobella Indradjaja & Chamdani, Neurohukum dan Batas Usia Anak dalam Pertanggungjawaban Pidana, Wijaya Putra Law Review, Vol. 3, No. 1, 2024, hlm. 21–38.
Diego Borbon, Free Will, Quarantines, and Moral Enhancements: Neuroabolitionism as an Alternative to Criminal Law, Frontiers in Sociology, Vol. 9, No. 1, 2024, hlm. 1–7.
Hakan Fischer, Mats E. Nilsson & Natalie C. Ebner, Why the Single-N Design Should Be the Default in Affective Neuroscience, Affective Science, Vol. 5, No. 1, 2024, hlm. 62–66.
Laurynas Adomaitis & Alexei Grinbaum, Neurotechnologies, Ethics, and the Limits of Free Will, Integrative Psychological and Behavioral Science, Vol. 58, No. 3, 2024, hlm. 894–907.
Malik, Mens Rea, Innovative Research Thoughts, Vol. 10, No. 3, 2024, hlm. 78–84.
Michael McKenna, Punishment and the Value of Deserved Suffering, Public Affairs Quarterly, Vol. 34, No. 2, 2020, hlm. 97–123.
Nurhayati & I Gusti Ayu Wulan Budi Setyani, Trauma Masa Anak-Anak dan Perilaku Agresi, Psikobuletin: Buletin Ilmiah Psikologi, Vol. 2, No. 3, 2021, hlm. 154–174.
Osborne F. X. Almeida & Nuno Sousa, Leveraging Neuroscience to Fight Stigma Around Mental Health, Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience, Vol. 15, No. 1, 2022, hlm. 1–11.
Puspita Winatakina & Suyadi, Teologi Al-Ma’ūm Perspektif Neurosains: Studi Kasus di LKSA Panti Asuhan Muhammadiyah Wates, Paramurobi: Jurnal Pendidikan Agama Islam, Vol. 5, No. 2, 2022, hlm. 22–35.
R. Ryan Darby, Ciaran Considine, Robert Weinstock & William C. Darby, Forensic Neurology: A Distinct Subspeciality at the Intersection of Neurology, Neuroscience and Law, Nature Reviews Neurology, Vol. 20, No. 3, 2024, hlm. 183–193.
Rafael Yuste, Tomàs de la Quadra-Salcedo & Miguel García Fernández, Neuro-Rights and New Charts of Digital Rights: A Dialogue Beyond the Limits of the Law, Indiana Journal of Global Legal Studies, Vol. 30, No. 1, 2023, hlm. 15–37.
Rifat Januar, Hilman Fauzi, Maya Ariyanti & Faradisya Heris, Study of Neuromarketing: Visual Influence with Decision Making on Impulse Buying, Kinetik: Game Technology, Information System, Computer Network, Computing, Electronics, and Control Journal, Vol. 6, No. 4, 2021, hlm. 295–304.
Selvies Lea Babutta, Memaknai Manusia dalam Dimensi Makhluk Hidup: Kajian Filosofis dari Sudut Pandang Biologi, Jurnal Filsafat Indonesia, Vol. 3, No. 2, 2020, hlm. 48–53.
Stephen P. Herman, NeuroLaw and Responsibility for Action, The Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law, Vol. 49, No. 1, 2021, hlm. 281–282.
Trinh Duy Thuyen, Nguyen Truong Thanh Hai, Armin Kunh, Tran Huu Tien & Nguyen Quang Dao, Biological Underpinnings of Criminal Behavior: A Comprehensive Review, Revista de Gestão Social e Ambiental, Vol. 18, No. 1, 2024, hlm. 1–15.
Zul Khaidir Kadir, Reinterpretasi Teori Lombroso dalam Konteks Hukum Pidana Modern: Kapan Born Criminal Menjadi Insanity Defense?, Jurnal Litigasi Amsir, 2024, hlm. 122–135.
Zul Khaidir Kadir, Perkembangan Pemikiran Neo-Lombrosian: Sebuah Tinjauan Teoretis terhadap Determinisme Biologis dalam Kriminologi, Hukum Inovatif: Jurnal Ilmu Hukum Sosial dan Humaniora, Vol. 2, No. 1, 2025, hlm. 1–18.
