The issue of which court has the authority to prosecute military personnel who commit general crimes remains a problem in the Indonesian criminal justice system. This problem arises from differences in regulations between the Military Courts Law and the Criminal Procedure Code regarding the judicial forum authorized to prosecute military personnel. This article aims to identify the normative conflicts arising from this phenomenon and to formulate arguments regarding the urgency of reforming the Military Courts Law. This article employs a normative legal research method using statutory and conceptual approach. The results indicate that there is a normative conflict between the Military Courts Law, which requires that military personnel who commit general crimes be tried in Military Courts, and the 2025 Criminal Procedure Code, which requires cases to be resolved based on the principle of connectivity through General Courts. Normatively, trials of military personnel who commit general crimes should be conducted in General Courts to ensure equality before the law and avoid the perception of preferential treatment due to the tendency for lighter sentences to be handed down in Military Courts. Furthermore, the demand for reform aligns with the evolving paradigm of Indonesian criminal law, which prioritizes restorative justice, namely, punishment that focuses not only on punishing the perpetrator but also on restoring the victims' losses and interests. Therefore, reforming the Military Courts Law is an urgent need to achieve legal certainty, justice, and harmonization of the national criminal justice system.