RATIO DECIDENDI MAJELIS HAKIM DALAM MEMUTUS PERKARA TINDAK PIDANA KORUPSI (STUDI KASUS PUTUSAN NOMOR 12/PID.SUS-TPK/2021/PN YYK)

Rizky Dya Alif, NIM.: 19103040088 (2023) RATIO DECIDENDI MAJELIS HAKIM DALAM MEMUTUS PERKARA TINDAK PIDANA KORUPSI (STUDI KASUS PUTUSAN NOMOR 12/PID.SUS-TPK/2021/PN YYK). Skripsi thesis, UIN SUNAN KALIJAGA YOGYAKARTA.

Preview	Text (RATIO DECIDENDI MAJELIS HAKIM DALAM MEMUTUS PERKARA TINDAK PIDANA KORUPSI (STUDI KASUS PUTUSAN NOMOR 12/PID.SUS-TPK/2021/PN YYK)) 19103040088_BAB-I_IV-atau-V_DAFTAR-PUSTAKA.pdf - Published Version Download (3MB) | Preview
	Text (RATIO DECIDENDI MAJELIS HAKIM DALAM MEMUTUS PERKARA TINDAK PIDANA KORUPSI (STUDI KASUS PUTUSAN NOMOR 12/PID.SUS-TPK/2021/PN YYK)) 19103040088_BAB-II_sampai_SEBELUM-BAB-TERAKHIR.pdf - Published Version Restricted to Registered users only Download (4MB) | Request a copy

Abstract

Yogyakarta District Court Decision Number 12/Pid.Sus-TPK/2021/PN Yyk, decided Mukti Ali Santoso as the defendant for the criminal act of corruption in project credit term funds without all lawsuits (onslag van recht vervolging). The Panel of Judges in this case considered that the Defendant's actions were not criminal acts, but civil acts. Meanwhile, through the Supreme Court Decision Number 5716 K/Pid.Sus/2022, the Defendant was found guilty of violating the provisions of Article 3 of Law Number 31 of 1999 jo. Law Number 20 of 2001 concerning Eradication of Corruption Crimes. The defendant was sentenced to 6 years imprisonment and a fine of Rp. 300,000,000.00 (three hundred million rupiahs) with a subsidiary sentence of 3 months imprisonment. Decision Number 12/Pid.Sus-TPK/2021/PN Yyk is considered contradictory to the Supreme Court Decision Number 5716 K/Pid.Sus/2022. On this basis, this research will examine the ratio decidendi of the Panel of Judges in Decision Number 12/Pid.Sus-TPK/2021/PN Yyk, as well as the reasons for the Panel of Judges at the Yogyakarta District Court considering the Defendant's actions to be a civil act. In reviewing the contents of the decision, the theory of legal considerations (ratio decidendi), theory of evidence and Non-Performing Loan theory is used as the analysis knife. This research is a type of normative research, which will be written in a descriptive analysis using a juridical-normative approach. The data sources used in this study are Decision Number 12/Pid.Sus-TPK/2021/PN Yyk and Supreme Court Decision Number 5716 K/Pid.Sus/2022, which will be analyzed using Law Number 31 of 1999 as has been amended by Law Number 20 of 2001 concerning Eradication of Criminal Acts of Corruption, and other related regulations. In addition, this study will also use data sources from other related references. In collecting data, library research was used. Analysis of all data obtained in the study will be analyzed qualitatively. The results of this study explain that, in the ratio decidendi the Panel of Judges uses considerations in the form of witness statements, expert statements, and the defendant's statements. The Panel of Judges considered that the Defendant's actions were civil acts, because the consequences of the Defendant's actions caused collective bad credit on several project loans. From the analysis carried out and supported by the Supreme Court Decision Number 5716 K/Pid.Sus/2022, it was found that according to the Panel of Judges of the Supreme Court the Defendant was seen as a person who participated in committing a crime (mede plagen), because it was proven to enrich other people. This is in accordance with the provisions of Article 3 of Law Number 31 of 1999 jo. Law Number 20 of 2001 concerning Eradication of Corruption Crimes.

Share this knowledge with your friends :

Actions (login required)

View Item