Dampak Ketiadaan Pedoman Pemidanaan Dalam Penjatuhan Sanksi Pidana Melebihi Pidana Maksimum Dalam KUHP (Studi Kasus Nomor 44/Pid.B/2018/Pn Gst)

Hulu, Elfiana (2022) Dampak Ketiadaan Pedoman Pemidanaan Dalam Penjatuhan Sanksi Pidana Melebihi Pidana Maksimum Dalam KUHP (Studi Kasus Nomor 44/Pid.B/2018/Pn Gst). S2 thesis, Universitas Kristen Indonesia.

	Text (Hal_Judul_Abstrak_Daftar_Isi) haljudulkatapengantarabstradll.pdf Available under License Creative Commons Attribution Non-commercial Share Alike. Download (791kB)
	Text (BAB_I) BAB I.pdf Restricted to Registered users only Available under License Creative Commons Attribution Non-commercial Share Alike. Download (624kB)
	Text (BAB_II) BAB II.pdf Restricted to Registered users only Available under License Creative Commons Attribution Non-commercial Share Alike. Download (807kB)
	Text (BAB_III) BAB III.pdf Restricted to Registered users only Available under License Creative Commons Attribution Non-commercial Share Alike. Download (560kB)
	Text (BAB_IV) BAB IV.pdf Restricted to Registered users only Available under License Creative Commons Attribution Non-commercial Share Alike. Download (585kB)
	Text (BAB_V) BAB V.pdf Restricted to Registered users only Available under License Creative Commons Attribution Non-commercial Share Alike. Download (137kB)
	Text (Daftar_Pustaka) DAFTAR PUSTAKA.pdf Restricted to Registered users only Available under License Creative Commons Attribution Non-commercial Share Alike. Download (246kB)

Abstract

Dalam Putusan Pengadilan Negeri Gunungsitoli Nomor 299/Pid.B/2013/PN.Gst). penulis mengemukakan kejanggalan didalam putusan hakim tersebut karena putusan hakim melebihi sanksi pidana yang telah diatur dalam pasal 351 ayat (2) KUHP yaitu sanksi pidana maksimal 5 tahun pidana penjara. Berdasarkan uraian tersebut, penulis tertarik melakukan penelitian dengan judul Dampak ketiadaan pedoman pemidanaan dalam penjatuhan pidana kepada pelaku tindak pidana penganiayaan yang melebihi pidana maksimum KUHP,(Studi Kasus Nomor 44/Pid.B/2018/PN Gst). Jenis penelitian yang digunakan dalam penelitian ini adalah jenis penelitian hukum normatif. Penelitian hukum normatif ini menitikberatkan pada studi kepustakaan. Penelitian ini menggunakan metode pendekatan penelitian peraturan perundang-undangan, dan metode pendekatan kasus. Dalam penelitian ini menggunakan data sekunder, data yang bersumber dari hasil pengkajian pustaka melalui pengumpulan bahan hukum. Penulisi menganalisis data secara kualitatif dengan pendekatan deskriptif. Serta penarikan kesimpulan yang dilakukan dengan menggunakan metode deduktif. Berdasarkan hasil temuan penelitian dan pembahasan, maka dapat disimpulkan bahwa Pengaturan Tentang Pedoman Pemidanaan Dalam Hukum Positif di Indonesia Belum diatur secara ekplisit dan tegas dalam KUHP sebagai aspiratif dan kodifikasi, sehingga dapat menimbulkan dampak ketidakadilan seperti disparitas pemidanaan dan adanya sanksi pidana yang melebihi ketentuan maksimum. Dalam Perspektif Ius Constituendum Pedoman Pemidanaan selayaknya di atur Dalam KUHP karna Gagasan tujuan pemidanaan sebagaimana dirumuskan dalam RUU KUHP menunjukkan adanya pemikiran baru dalam perkembangan teori pemidanaan yang mempunyai ciri lebih komprehensif dan bernuansa kearifan lokal tentang tujuan pidana. Pertimbangan hakim dalam penjatuhan pidana terhadap terdakwa dalam Putusan Nomor 44/Pid.B/2018/PN.Gst, dapat disimpulkan bahwa, hakim menjatuhkan pidana penjara selama 6 tahun. Putusan ini jelas melanggar ketentuan hukuman maksimum (special straf maxima) yang telah diatur dalam Pasal 351 ayat (2) KUHP yang menentukan bahwa pelaku dihukum penjara selama-lamanya 5 tahun”. Kata Kunci: Pedoman Pemidanaan; Pertimbangan Hakim; Tindak Pidana Penganiayaan./ In the decision of the Gunungsitoli District Court Number 299/Pid.B/2013/PN.Gst). However, after being examined by the researcher, the researcher stated that there were irregularities in the judge's decision because the judge's decision exceeded the criminal sanctions stipulated in Article 351 paragraph (2) of the Criminal Code, namely a maximum criminal sanction of 5 years in prison. Based on this description, researcher interested in conducting the research with title The Impact Of Absance Criminal Guidelines in Imposing Criminal Acts on Perpetrators of Criminal Acts of Persecution that Exceed the Maximum Penalty of the Criminal Code, (Case Study Number 44/Pid.B/2018/PN Gst). The type of research used in this research is normative legal research. This normative legal research focuses on literature studies. This study uses a research approach to legislation, and a case approach method. This research using secondary data, data sourced from the results of a literature review through the collection of legal materials. The researcher analyzed the data qualitatively with a descriptive approach and drawing conclusions using the deductive method. Based on the results of the research findings and discussion, it can be concluded that the Regulation on Guidelines for Criminalization in Positive Law in Indonesia has not been explicitly and firmly regulated in the Criminal Code as aspirational and codified, so that it can cause unfair impacts such as disparity in punishment and the existence of criminal sanctions that exceed the maximum provisions. In the perspective of the Ius Constituendum, the Guidelines for Criminalization should be regulated in the Criminal Code because the idea of the purpose of punishment as formulated in the Draft Criminal Code indicates that there is a new thought in the development of the theory of punishment which has more comprehensive characteristics and nuances of local wisdom regarding the purpose of crime. The judge's consideration in imposing a crime against the defendant in Decision Number 44/Pid.B/2018/PN.Gst, it can be concluded that the judge sentenced him to imprisonment for 6 years. This decision clearly violates the provisions of the maximum sentence (special straf maxima) which has been regulated in Article 351 paragraph (2) of the Criminal Code which states that "if the act of torture causes the person to die, he is sentenced to a maximum imprisonment of 5 years". Keywords: Criminal Guidelines; Judge's consideration; Crime of Persecution:

Actions (login required)

View Item