ANALISIS YURIDIS PUTUSAN HAKIM TENTANG TINDAK PIDANA KORUPSI KASUS SUAP PENGADAAN BANTUAN SOSIAL (STUDI KASUS PUTUSAN NOMOR. 29/Pid.Sus-Tpk/2021/PN. Jkt.Pst)

M. Ansori, NIM.: 17103040137 (2023) ANALISIS YURIDIS PUTUSAN HAKIM TENTANG TINDAK PIDANA KORUPSI KASUS SUAP PENGADAAN BANTUAN SOSIAL (STUDI KASUS PUTUSAN NOMOR. 29/Pid.Sus-Tpk/2021/PN. Jkt.Pst). Skripsi thesis, UIN SUNAN KALIJAGA YOGYAKARTA.

Preview	Text (ANALISIS YURIDIS PUTUSAN HAKIM TENTANG TINDAK PIDANA KORUPSI KASUS SUAP PENGADAAN BANTUAN SOSIAL (STUDI KASUS PUTUSAN NOMOR. 29/Pid.Sus-Tpk/2021/PN. Jkt.Pst)) 17103040137_BAB-I_IV-atau-V_DAFTAR-PUSTAKA.pdf - Published Version Download (2MB) | Preview
	Text (ANALISIS YURIDIS PUTUSAN HAKIM TENTANG TINDAK PIDANA KORUPSI KASUS SUAP PENGADAAN BANTUAN SOSIAL (STUDI KASUS PUTUSAN NOMOR. 29/Pid.Sus-Tpk/2021/PN. Jkt.Pst)) 17103040137_BAB-II_sampai_SEBELUM-BAB-TERAKHIR.pdf - Published Version Restricted to Registered users only Download (3MB) | Request a copy

Abstract

The judge's consideration has used unreasonable considerations as a thing that lightens the sentence for the defendant. Such absurdity is contained in the judges' mitigating considerations, namely “the defendant has been reproached enough, beaten by society when at that time the defendant has not been found guilty.” The study seeks to answer two questions namely: (1) What is the part of the judge's consideration in deciding the case on the verdict Number 29/pid.sustpk/ 2021/pn.jkt.pst and (2) How the abuse forms authority exercised by the defendant in the case. This research is a literature research that is descriptive-analytical, using a normative approach. This study aims to collect data from various literature related to research, such as court decisions, laws and regulations, and other literature by analyzing documents, archives, official records in order to synchronize between various theories and implementations. There is an inaccuracy in the use of articles used by law enforcement in handling the case of the accused in Decision Number. 29/Pid.Sus- Tpk/2021/PN.Jkt.Pst. JPB was charged with violating Articles 11 and 12 b of Law No. 31 of 1999 and the defendant was sentenced to 12 years in prison. The accused should be charged under Article 2 paragraph (2), namely life imprisonment or the death penalty. The author concludes as follows: (1) the judge's consideration regarding the sentence given in the case of corruption cases committed by state administrators, namely the defendant is less than optimal because the defendant is only sentenced to 12 years in prison while the defendant should be sentenced to life or the death penalty. (2) The judge's consideration of mitigating matters for the accused is very unreasonable because the defendant has been reviled and cursed enough by the public and it is a mitigating matter for the accused.

Share this knowledge with your friends :

Actions (login required)

View Item