Institutional Repository UIN Sunan Kalijaga YogyakartaIMPLIKASI YURIDIS PUTUSAN HAKIM DALAM PENERAPAN PASAL 44 KUHP TERHADAP PELAKU PEMBUNUHAN PENGIDAP SKIZOFRENIA PARANOID (STUDI KOMPARATIF PUTUSAN NOMOR 10/PID.B/2019/PN KPH DAN PUTUSAN NOMOR 150/PID.B/2024/PN JKT.BRT)NIM.: 22103060004Nimas AdifaauthorParanoid schizophrenia is a severe mental disorder that impairs an individual's ability to distinguish reality from delusion, often leading to uncontrolled aggressive behavior. In the context of homicide offenses, this condition creates a legal dilemma between retributive justice for victims and the humanitarian principle of protecting individuals incapable of full criminal responsibility. In Indonesia, the application of Article 44 of the Criminal Code (KUHP) to homicide perpetrators with paranoid schizophrenia remains inconsistent, as evidenced by Decision No. 10/Pid.B/2019/PN Kph, acquittal with mandatory medical rehabilitation and Decision No. 150/Pid.B/2024/PN Jkt.Brt, 16-year imprisonment, with Article 44 merely as a mitigating factor. This study employs a qualitative research design with a descriptive– analytical–comparative character and a normative approach. The data were collected through library research, with primary sources consisting of Decision Number 10/Pid.B/2019/PN Kph, Decision Number 150/Pid.B/2024/PN Jkt.Brt, and Article 44 of the Indonesian Criminal Code (KUHP), supported by relevant literature and statutory regulations as secondary data. Data collection was conducted through document study and subsequently analyzed using a normativecomparative method to examine and compare the legal reasoning of both decisions in interpreting the element of “non-imputability.” The analysis aims to identify the juridical implications of judicial disparity on legal certainty within the Indonesian criminal justice system. The findings reveal that the lack of uniform interpretation of the element of “non-imputability” under Article 44 KUHP undermines the principle of legal certainty (rechtszekerheid). Juridical implications include disparities in the defendant's legal status, execution mechanisms, civil-administrative consequences, imbalances between rehabilitative and retributive aspects, and inadequate fulfillment of victims' rights (restitution, compensation, and long-term protection). This disparity stems from judges' subjective assessment of psychiatric expert testimony and the absence of standardized parameters for criminal responsibility.345 Hukum Pidana2026-01-09UIN SUNAN KALIJAGA YOGYAKARTA;FAKULTAS SYARIAH DAN HUKUMThesis

For work being deposited by its own author: In self-archiving this collection of files and associated bibliographic metadata, I grant Institutional Repository UIN Sunan Kalijaga Yogyakarta the right to store them and to make them permanently available publicly for free on-line. I declare that this material is my own intellectual property and I understand that Institutional Repository UIN Sunan Kalijaga Yogyakarta does not assume any responsibility if there is any breach of copyright in distributing these files or metadata. (All authors are urged to prominently assert their copyright on the title page of their work.)

For work being deposited by someone other than its author: I hereby declare that the collection of files and associated bibliographic metadata that I am archiving at Institutional Repository UIN Sunan Kalijaga Yogyakarta) is in the public domain. If this is not the case, I accept full responsibility for any breach of copyright that distributing these files or metadata may entail.

Clicking on the deposit button indicates your agreement to these terms.