PERTIMBANGAN HUKUM HAKIM DALAM MENJATUHKAN SANKSI YANG BERBEDA DENGAN PENUNTUT UMUM TERHADAP TINDAK PIDANA PERKOSAAN (STUDI KASUS PUTUSAN NOMOR 437/PID.B/2017/PN.Pdg)

Milla Minhatul Maula, NIM. 16340018 (2020) PERTIMBANGAN HUKUM HAKIM DALAM MENJATUHKAN SANKSI YANG BERBEDA DENGAN PENUNTUT UMUM TERHADAP TINDAK PIDANA PERKOSAAN (STUDI KASUS PUTUSAN NOMOR 437/PID.B/2017/PN.Pdg). Skripsi thesis, UIN SUNAN KALIJAGA YOGYAKARTA.

Preview	Text (PERTIMBANGAN HUKUM HAKIM DALAM MENJATUHKAN SANKSI YANG BERBEDA DENGAN PENUNTUT UMUM TERHADAP TINDAK PIDANA PERKOSAAN (STUDI KASUS PUTUSAN NOMOR 437/PID.B/2017/PN.Pdg)) 16340018_BAB-I_IV-atau-V_DAFTAR-PUSTAKA.pdf Download (3MB) | Preview
	Text (PERTIMBANGAN HUKUM HAKIM DALAM MENJATUHKAN SANKSI YANG BERBEDA DENGAN PENUNTUT UMUM TERHADAP TINDAK PIDANA PERKOSAAN (STUDI KASUS PUTUSAN NOMOR 437/PID.B/2017/PN.Pdg)) 16340018_BAB-II_sampai_SEBELUM-BAB-TERAKHIR.pdf Restricted to Registered users only Download (4MB) | Request a copy

Abstract

Judges in the judicial process have a big responsibility to the community in producing decisions that reflect legal certainty, justice and benefits, so that the judiciary becomes a place to protect the hopes and desires of the community. Judicial process is a way of solving criminal cases which includes Investigation, Pre-prosecution, Prosecution and Trial. The existence of a legal product, namely a Court Deision which has permanent legal force (incracht) is a sign of the end of the settlement of criminal cases. In general, there are three possibilities for the content of the Judge’s Decision, namely the Sentencing Verdict, the Free Decision, and the Decision which is free from all legal charges. In the event that the Judge passes a decision that exceeds the Public Prosecutor’s demands, it is certain that the Defendant/ Legal Counsel will object to the Court’s decision. The compilers found a rape legal case in which the case of imposing a criminal decision between the public prosecutor and the judge was different. Court Decision Number 437/Pid.B/2017/Pn.Pdg dated September 5, 2017 was found to have been legally and convincingly proven guilty of a criminal act of forcing a woman to have sex with him on an ongoing basis as regulated and punishable under Article 285 in conjunction with Article 64 paragraph (1) KUHP and sentenced to imprisonment for 4 (four) years, while the Public Prosecutor demands that the defendent be sentenced to imprisonment for 3 (three) years. This study aims to determine hiw the judge’s consideration in making a decision that is different from the demands of the publict prosecutor based on the decision Number 437/Pid.B/2017/Pn.Pdg. This type of research is library research (library research) with a normative juridical approach. The data analysis method used by compilers is descriptive analytic. Data collection was carried out by compilers with literature study. The theory used by the compilers to analyze is the theory of justice and the theory of punishment. Based on the disscussion, it can be concluded, 1) In the Court’s decision Number 437/Pid.B/2017/Pn.Pdg, in deciding a case the Judge uses juridical and non-juridical consideration’s. In this case, the Judge’s consideration in making a decision that went beyond the Public Prosecutor’s demands was things that incriminated the Defendant and the most important thing was that there was evidence that stated the guilt of the defendant. 2) The decision of the Padang District Court Number 437/Pid.B/2017/Pn.Pdg has not fulfilled the sense of justice, especially for the victim. But it is in accordance with the value of legal certainty.

Share this knowledge with your friends :

Actions (login required)

View Item