ANALISIS DISPARITAS DALAM PENJATUHAN PUTUSAN BAGI PELAKU TINDAK PIDANA “MAIN HAKIM SENDIRI” (EIGENRICHTING).

Adhinda Ratih Nuriana, Muhammad Rustamaji

Abstract

This study aims to explain the legal considerations of judges in imposing criminal penalties on perpetrators of "eigenrichting" and to analyze the disparities contained in Decision Number 235/Pid.B/2017/PN.Brb and Decision Number 84/Pid.B/2017/PN .snt. This research is a normative legal research with a prescriptive nature of research and uses a case approach. This research shows that the basis of the judge's legal considerations in the two decisions both considered the elements in Article 170 paragraph (2) 3 of the Criminal Code, all of the defendants have been proven to fulfill the elements of the article. However, in legal considerations, the judge considers juridical aspects such as the indictment, elements of the articles charged, charges and pledoi, as well as non-juridical aspects such as the facts found in the trial. Apart from that, based on the judge's legal argument, what gave rise to the disparity in the two decisions was found in the judge's considerations, namely: 1. The aggravating and mitigating circumstances of the defendant; 2. The background of the defendant's actions; 3. As a result of the defendant's actions; and 4. Purpose of sentencing. Apart from that, other factors that cause disparity are the forgiveness of Decision Number 84/Pid.B/2017/PN.Snt and the provision of condolence money to the victim's family.

Keywords : Disparity, Legal Considerations

Full Text:

PDF

References

Ahmad Rifai. 2010. Penemuan Hukum. Jakarta: Sinar Grafika. AL. Wisnubroto. 2014. Praktik Persidangan Perdata.

Asrizal Saiin dan Ahmad Iffan, 2018. Fenomena Tindakan Main Hakim Sendiri Dalam Hukum Negara dan Hukum Islam. Jurnal Studi Islam Vol 1, No. 2

Erniwati. 2015. Kejahatan Kekerasan Dalam Perspektif Kriminologi. Mizani Vol. 25, No. 2

Fitri Wahyuni. 2017. Dasar-Dasar Hukum Pidana di Indonesia. Tanggerang: Nusantara Persada Utama.

Hamzah Hamzah. 2001. Sistem Pidana dan Pemidanaan di Indonesia. Jakarta: Pradnya Paramita.

Hamzah. Andi. 2001. Hukum Acara Pidana Indonesia. Jakarta: Sinar Grafika.

Harkrisnowo Harkristuti. 2003. Reformasi Hukum di Indonesia:Menuju Upaya Sinergistik untuk Pencapaiannya, Majalah Hukum Nasional, dalam Majalah Hukum Nasional, Nomor 2.

Harkristuti Harkrsnowo. 2003. Rekonstruksi Konsep Pemidanaan: Suatu Gugatan terhadap Proses Legislasi dan Pemidanaan di Indonesia”, dalam majalah KHN Newsletter. Jakarta.

Kitab Undang-undang Hukum Pidana

Kitab Undang-Undang Hukum Acara Pidana Pasal 170 ayat (2) ke-3 KUHP

Kristanto, Kiki. 2015, Perbuatan Eigen Righting (Main Hakim Sendiri) Dalam Perspektif Hukum Pidana. Jurnal Morality, Vol. 2, No. 2.

Livia Musfika Santi, 2021. Faktor-Faktor Penyebab Disparitas Pidana dalam Pertimbangan Putusan Hakim Terhadap Pelaku Tindak Pidana Pembunuhan Berencana. Verstek Jurnal Hukum Acara. 7(2): 437-447

Muladi dan Barda Nawawi. 2005. Teori-Teori dan Kebijakan Pidana. Bandung: PT. Alumni.

Mulyadi L. 2010. Seraut Wajah Putusan Hakim Dalam Hukum Acara Pidana Indonesia. Bandung: Citra Aditya Bakti.

Nimerodi Gulo & Ade Kurniawan M, “Disparitas dalam Penjatuhan Pidana”. Jurnal Masalah-Masalah Hukum 47, No. 3 (2018): 222.

Peter Mahmud Marzuki. 2016. Penelitian Hukum. Jakarta: Kencana Prenada Media Group.

Putusan Nomor 84/Pid.B/2017/PN.Snt

Putusan Nomor 235/Pid.B/2017/PN.Brb

Sri Dewi Rahayu, “Pertimbangan Hakim dalam Putusan Perkara Tindak Pidana

Narkotika.” PAMPAS: Journal Of Criminal Law 1, No. 1 (2020):131.

Tina Asmarawati. 2020. Perspektif Hukum dalam Main Hakim Sendiri. Jurnal Ilmu Hukum, Vol. 3, Nomor 1.

Topo Santoso dan Eva Achjani Zulfa. 2010. Kriminologi. Jakarta:Raja Grafindo Perkasa. Undang-Undang Dasar Negara Republik Indonesia Tahun 1945

Undang-Undang Nomor 48 Tahun 2009 tentang Kekuasaan Kehakiman

Warih Anjari. 2014. Penomena Kekerasan Sebagai Bentuk Kejahatan (Violence). Jurnal ISSN 2338- 7785, Vol.1, No.1.

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.