PEMBATALAN PUTUSAN BEBAS AKIBAT PENGABAIAN VISUM ET REPERTUM (STUDI PUTUSAN MAHKAMAH AGUNG NOMOR 992KPID2020)

Ditria Fridyaswari Twenthina, Itok Dwi Kurniawan

Abstract

This article aims to determine the suitability of the Supreme Court's considerations in canceling the acquittal by Judex Factie in the rape case against Article 253 paragraph (1) of the Criminal Procedure Code. The type of legal research in this article is normative legal research with a case approach. The technique used in collecting legal materials in this research is literature study. This study uses an analytical technique with the nature of deduction using the syllogistic method, which begins with proposing a major premise, followed by proposing a minor premise in the form of legal facts and conclusions will be drawn from these two premises. Based on this research, it was found that the Judex Factie judge at the Oelamasi District Court was proven not to have applied a rule of law or a rule of law was not applied as it should. So that the consideration of the Supreme Court in canceling the acquittal by Judex Factie in the rape case was correct and in accordance with Article 253 paragraph (1) of the Criminal Procedure Code.

Keywords: Supreme Court; Consideration; Visum et Repertum

Full Text:

PDF

References

Andi Sofyan, Abd. Asis, Hukum Acara Pidana Suatu Pengantar. Jakarta: Kencana, 2014.

Ardhya Fauzah Fardhyanti, dan Puti Priyana, “Visum Et Repertum Dalam Proses Pembuktian Perkara Pidana Pemerkosaan.” Widya Yuridika 5, No. 2 (2022): 389-400. https://doi.org/10.31328/wy.v5i2.3589.

Hangsi Priyanto, “Pembuatan Visum Et Repertum Oleh Dokter Sebagai Upaya Mengungkap Perkara di Dalam Proses Pengadilan." Jurnal Idea Hukum 5, No. 1 (2019): 1316-1331. http://dx.doi.org/10.20884/1.jih.2019.5.1.107.

Jantapar Simamora, “Kepastian Hukum Pengajuan Kasasi Oleh Jaksa Penuntut Umum Terhadap Vonis Bebas." Jurnal Yudisial 7, No. 1 (2014): 1-17. http://dx.doi.org/10.29123/jy.v7i1.90.

Moh. Taufik Makarao, Suharsil, Hukum Acara Pidana Dalam Teori dan Praktek. Bogor: Ghalia Indonesia, 2010.

M. Yahya Harahap, Pembahasan Permasalahan dan Penerapan KUHAP Pemeriksaan Sidang Pengadilan, Banding, Kasasi, dan Peninjauan Kembali. Jakarta: Sinar Grafika, 2012.

Ni Made Yulia Chitta Dewi, A.A Sagung Laksmi Dewi, dan Luh Putu Suryani, “Asas Unus Testis Nullus Testis dalam Tindak Pidana Pemerkosaan Anak ." Jurnal Konstitusi Hukum 2, No. 1 (2021): 191-195. https://doi.org/10.22225/jkh.2.1.2993.191-195.

Peter Mahmud Marzuki, Penelitian Hukum. Jakarta: Kencana Pranada Media, 2017.

Pramesthi Dyah Sitoresmi, “Hak Terdakwa Menghadirkan Saksi yang Meringankan (A De Charge) Dalam Persidangan Perkara Penganiayaan.” Verstek 6, No. 3 (2018): 214-227. https://doi.org/10.20961/jv.v6i3.39189.

Putusan Mahkamah Agung Nomor 992 K/Pid/2020.

Putusan Nomor 45/Pid.B/2020/PN Olm.

Rendi Renaldi Mumbunan, “Upaya Hukum Biasa dan Luar Biasa Terhadap Putusan Hakim dalam Perkara Pidana." Lex Crimen 8, No. 10 (2018): 40-47.

Rian Pertiwi, dan Bambang Santoso, “Analisis Pengabaian Visum Et Repertum Oleh Hakim Pengadilan Negeri Kabanjahe Menjatuhkan Putusan Bebas Sebagai Alasan Kasasi Penuntut Umum (Studi Putusan Mahkamah Agung Nomor 1041K/Pid/2014).” Verstek 4, No. 3 (2016): 165-177. https://doi.org/10.20961/jv.v4i3.38776.

Rusli Muhammad, Hukum Acara Pidana Kontemporer. Bandung: PT. Citra Aditya Bakti, 2007.

Subekti, Hukum Pembuktian. Jakarta: Pradnya Paramitha, 2001.

Undang-Undang Negara Republik Indonesia Nomor 8 Tahun 1981 tentang Hukum Acara Pidana.

Undang-Undang Nomor 48 Tahun 2009 tentang Kekuasaan Kehakiman.

Zahrah Putri Arum Nabilah Pratami, “Peran Visum Et Repertum Dalam Proses Penyidikan Tindak Pidana Perkosaan.” Justitia: Jurnal Ilmu Hukum dan Humaniora 8, No. 6 (2021): 1388-1399. http://dx.doi.org/10.31604/justitia.v8i6.1388-1399.

DOI: https://doi.org/10.20961/jv.v10i4.72840

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.