The repository administrator has not yet configured an RDF license.
LEGAL REASONING MAJELIS HAKIM TERHADAP PERKARA TINDAK PIDANA NARKOTIKA (STUDI KASUS PUTUSAN NOMOR 631/PID.SUS/2021/PN SMG, PUTUSAN 6/PID.SUS/2022/PT SMG DAN PUTUSAN NOMOR 3443 K/PID.SUS/2022)
In deciding a case, the court must consider fundamental principles such as the rule of law, justice, and utility to ensure an ideal verdict. On one hand, the verdict must also have a deterrent effect on offenders, particularly in drug-related crimes. This aims to prevent the offender from repeating their actions and to hold them accountable for their conduct. Additionally, it is hoped that the decisive actions taken by law enforcement will help reduce the rising crime rates in Indonesia, especially drug-related offenses. Regarding drug-related crimes, there are several court rulings, including Semarang District Court Decision Number 631/Pid.Sus/2021/PN SMG, Decision Number 6/Pid.Sus/2022/PT SMG, and Decision Number 3443 K/Pid.Sus/2022. This thesis discusses the legal reasoning of the Panel of Judges at the Semarang District Court, Semarang High Court, and the Supreme Court regarding narcotics criminal cases. This research uses the type of normative legal research. The nature of this study is descriptive-analytical. The approach used in this research is juridical-normative. The legal sources in this study consist of primary legal materials, secondary legal materials, and tertiary legal materials. The data is supplemented by interviews with judges from the Semarang District Court and the Semarang High Court. Data collection techniques involve library research. The collected data is then analyzed qualitatively using a deductive method. The theoretical framework includes theories of criminal punishment, theories of sentencing. The results of the research on Decision Number 631/Pid.Sus/2021/PN Smg can be summarized as follows: First, Decision Number 631/Pid.Sus/2021/PN Smg is in accordance with the applicable laws and meets all the elements of criminal punishment and the relevant aspects, including legal reasoning, material aspects, and the philosophical aspects of sentencing. However, the court did not impose a heavier penalty on the defendant despite the fact that the defendant had been previously convicted for the same offense (recidivist). Second, the legal reasoning of the Supreme Court in overturning the Semarang High Court Decision Number 6/Pid.Sus/2022/PT Smg, in Decision Number 3443 K/Pid.Sus/2022, is in accordance with the applicable laws and follows the reasoning process consistent with Ratio Decidendi theory. The Supreme Court considered that although the defendant was not using methamphetamine at the time of arrest, the evidence and legal facts indicated that the defendant's actions were part of a series of events intended to use methamphetamine. Consequently, the defendant was sentenced under Article 127 paragraph (1) of Law No. 35 of 2009 on Narcotics.
FAKULTAS SYARI’AH DAN HUKUM, UIN SUNAN KALIJAGA YOGYAKARTA
NIM.: 19103040083 Maulana Cahya Permana Putra
LEGAL REASONING MAJELIS HAKIM TERHADAP PERKARA TINDAK PIDANA NARKOTIKA (STUDI KASUS PUTUSAN NOMOR 631/PID.SUS/2021/PN SMG, PUTUSAN 6/PID.SUS/2022/PT SMG DAN PUTUSAN NOMOR 3443 K/PID.SUS/2022) (Text)
LEGAL REASONING MAJELIS HAKIM TERHADAP PERKARA TINDAK PIDANA NARKOTIKA (STUDI KASUS PUTUSAN NOMOR 631/PID.SUS/2021/PN SMG, PUTUSAN 6/PID.SUS/2022/PT SMG DAN PUTUSAN NOMOR 3443 K/PID.SUS/2022) (Other)
HTML Summary of #69281 LEGAL REASONING MAJELIS HAKIM TERHADAP PERKARA TINDAK PIDANA NARKOTIKA (STUDI KASUS PUTUSAN NOMOR 631/PID.SUS/2021/PN SMG, PUTUSAN 6/PID.SUS/2022/PT SMG DAN PUTUSAN NOMOR 3443 K/PID.SUS/2022)