title: ANALISIS PUTUSAN KASASI PIDANA MATI TERHADAP  PELAKU TINDAK PIDANA NARKOTIKA  (Studi Putusan Nomor 5832 K/Pid.Sus/2022)
creator: Vincentia , Cathrine	
subject: 340 Ilmu hukum
description: Hakim dalam menjatuhkan suatu putusan harus didasarkan pada surat dakwaan  dan segala sesuatu yang terbukti dalam pemeriksaan sidang. Harapannya, putusan  hakim tersebut dapat memenuhi keadilan substantif, namun masih banyak putusan  terhadap pelaku tindak pidana narkotika yang dirasa kurang sesuai dengan  undang-undang yang berlaku. Seperti halnya dalam kasus tindak pidana narkotika  yang telah diputus bebas pada Pengadilan Negeri Tanjung Karang dengan Nomor  Putusan: 13/Pid.Sus/2022/PN Tjk, akan tetapi Penuntut Umum kemudian  mengajukan permohonan Kasasi ke Mahkamah Agung. Mahkamah Agung  memeriksa perkara a quo kemudian membatalkan putusan Judex Facti serta  mengadili sendiri perkara tersebut. Berdasarkan hal tersebut maka perlu dilakukan  penelitian dengan permasalahan: Bagaimanakah dasar pertimbangan hukum  Hakim dalam penjatuhan putusan kasasi pidana mati terhadap pelaku tindak  pidana narkotika dalam Putusan Nomor 5832 K/Pid.Sus/2022 dan Apakah  penyebab disparitas antara putusan Pengadilan Negeri Tanjung Karang Nomor  13/Pid.Sus/2022/PN Tjk dengan Putusan Mahkamah Agung Nomor 5832  K/Pid.Sus/2022.  Pendekatan masalah yang digunakan pada skripsi ini menggunakan pendekatan  yuridis normatif dan yuridis empiris. Sumber data yang digunakan yaitu data  primer dan sekunder. Narasumber terdiri dari Hakim Pengadilan Negeri Bandar  Lampung, Jaksa Kejaksaan Negeri Bandar Lampung, dan Dosen Bagian Hukum  Pidana Fakultas Hukum Universitas Lampung.  Hasil penelitian dan pembahasan menunjukan bahwa pertimbangan hakim dalam  menjatuhkan putusan kasasi pidana mati terhadap pelaku tindak pidana narkotika  dalam Putusan Nomor 5832 K/Pid.Sus/2022 yaitu karena Judex Facti dalam  menangani perkara a quo telah salah dalam menerapkan hukum terkhusus hukum  pembuktian, dimana pencabutan keterangan yang dilakukan oleh saksi di muka  persidangan dijadikan dasar oleh hakim untuk membebaskan terdakwa tanpa  mencari kebenaran materiil pencabutan keterangan tersebut. Kemudian juga  terdapat pertimbangan hakim mengenai hal-hal yang memberatkan terdakwa  yakni bahwa terdakwa merupakan narapidana, perbuatan terdakwa telah  menghambat program pemerintah memberantas penyalahguna narkotika, dan  terdakwa terlibat jaringan peredaran gelap. Adapun penyebab disparitas antara  Putusan Tingkat Pertama dengan Tingkat Kasasinya yakni Faktor yang bersumber  dari hakim dan faktor teori Ratio Decidendi.  Adapun saran yang diberikan dalam penelitian skripsi ini ialah Majelis hakim  dalam memeriksa suatu perkara tindak pidana khususnya narkotika diharapkan  lebih konsisten dalam mengemban amanat memberantas tindak pidana narkotika.  Mahkamah Agung diharapkan dapat memberlakukan penerapan dari sistem kamar  Mahkamah Agung secara konsisten, agar permasalahan-permasalahan hukum  yang terhadapnya belum terdapat kesamaan pendapat, dapat terselesaikan  sehingga dapat menjaga kesatuan penerapan hukum, konsistensi putusan, dan  mengurangi disparitas putusan.  Kata Kunci: Pertimbangan Hakim, Penjatuhan Putusan, Tindak Pidana  Narkotika.    The judge in making a decision must be based on the indictment and everything  that was proven in the trial examination. The hope is that the judge's decision will  fulfill substantive justice, but there are still many decisions against perpetrators of  narcotics crimes that are deemed not in accordance with the applicable law. As in  the case of a narcotics crime which was acquitted at the Tanjung Karang District  Court with Decision Number: 13/Pid.Sus/2022/PN Tjk, however the Public  Prosecutor then filed an appeal of cassation to the Supreme Court. The Supreme  Court examined the case then overturned the decision of the Judex Facti and  judge the case itself. Based on this case, it is necessary to conduct a research with  problems: How is the basis of the Judge's legal reasoning in the imposition of a  death penalty cassation verdict against a narcotics offender in Decision Number  5832 K/Pid.Sus/2022 and what is the cause of the disparity between the decisions  of Tanjung Karang District Court Number 13/ Pid.Sus/2022/PN Tjk with Supreme  Court Decision Number 5832 K/Pid.Sus/2022.  The problem approach used in this thesis uses a normative juridical and empirical  juridical approaches. The data sources used are primary and secondary data. The  resource persons consisted of Judge of Bandar Lampung District Court,  Prosecutor of Bandar Lampung District Attorney's Office, and Lecturer of  Criminal Law Department, Faculty of Law, University of Lampung.  The results of the research and discussion show that the judge's legal reasoning in  imposing a death penalty cassation decision against the perpetrator of a narcotics  crime in Decision Number 5832 K/Pid.Sus/2022 is because the Judex Facti in  handling the case a quo had been wrong in applying the law, especially the law of  evidence, where the revocation of testimony made by witnesses in front of the  trial was used as a basis by the judge to acquit the defendant without seeking the  material truth of the revocation of the testimony. Then there were also  considerations by the judge regarding the matters that aggravated the defendant,  namely that the defendant was a convict, the defendant's actions had hampered   government programs to eradicate narcotics abusers, and the defendant was  involved in an illicit trafficking network. The causes of the disparity between the  First Level Court Decision and the Cassation Level are factors originating from  the judge and the Ratio Decidendi theory factor.  The suggestions given in this thesis research are that the panel of judges in  examining a criminal case, especially narcotics, is expected to be more consistent  in carrying out the mandate to eradicate narcotics crimes. The Supreme Court is  expected to be able to apply the application of the Supreme Court chamber system  consistently, so that legal issues on which there is no common opinion can be  resolved so as to maintain the unity of legal application, consistency of decisions,  and reduce disparity of decisions.  Keywords: Judge's Legal Reasoning, Decision Making, Narcotics Crime.
publisher: FAKULTAS HUKUM
date: 2024-05-15
type: Skripsi
type: NonPeerReviewed
format: text
identifier: http://digilib.unila.ac.id/82700/1/ABSTRAK%20-%20vincentia%20cathrine.pdf
format: text
identifier: http://digilib.unila.ac.id/82700/2/SKRIPSI%20FULL%20-%20vincentia%20cathrine.pdf
format: text
identifier: http://digilib.unila.ac.id/82700/3/SKRIPSI%20FULL%20TANPA%20PEMBAHASAN%20-%20vincentia%20cathrine.pdf
identifier:   Vincentia , Cathrine   (2024) ANALISIS PUTUSAN KASASI PIDANA MATI TERHADAP PELAKU TINDAK PIDANA NARKOTIKA (Studi Putusan Nomor 5832 K/Pid.Sus/2022).  FAKULTAS HUKUM, UNIVERSITAS LAMPUNG .     
relation: http://digilib.unila.ac.id/82700/