<> "The repository administrator has not yet configured an RDF license."^^ . <> . . "ANALISIS PUTUSAN KASASI PIDANA MATI TERHADAP\r\nPELAKU TINDAK PIDANA NARKOTIKA\r\n(Studi Putusan Nomor 5832 K/Pid.Sus/2022)"^^ . "Hakim dalam menjatuhkan suatu putusan harus didasarkan pada surat dakwaan\r\ndan segala sesuatu yang terbukti dalam pemeriksaan sidang. Harapannya, putusan\r\nhakim tersebut dapat memenuhi keadilan substantif, namun masih banyak putusan\r\nterhadap pelaku tindak pidana narkotika yang dirasa kurang sesuai dengan\r\nundang-undang yang berlaku. Seperti halnya dalam kasus tindak pidana narkotika\r\nyang telah diputus bebas pada Pengadilan Negeri Tanjung Karang dengan Nomor\r\nPutusan: 13/Pid.Sus/2022/PN Tjk, akan tetapi Penuntut Umum kemudian\r\nmengajukan permohonan Kasasi ke Mahkamah Agung. Mahkamah Agung\r\nmemeriksa perkara a quo kemudian membatalkan putusan Judex Facti serta\r\nmengadili sendiri perkara tersebut. Berdasarkan hal tersebut maka perlu dilakukan\r\npenelitian dengan permasalahan: Bagaimanakah dasar pertimbangan hukum\r\nHakim dalam penjatuhan putusan kasasi pidana mati terhadap pelaku tindak\r\npidana narkotika dalam Putusan Nomor 5832 K/Pid.Sus/2022 dan Apakah\r\npenyebab disparitas antara putusan Pengadilan Negeri Tanjung Karang Nomor\r\n13/Pid.Sus/2022/PN Tjk dengan Putusan Mahkamah Agung Nomor 5832\r\nK/Pid.Sus/2022.\r\nPendekatan masalah yang digunakan pada skripsi ini menggunakan pendekatan\r\nyuridis normatif dan yuridis empiris. Sumber data yang digunakan yaitu data\r\nprimer dan sekunder. Narasumber terdiri dari Hakim Pengadilan Negeri Bandar\r\nLampung, Jaksa Kejaksaan Negeri Bandar Lampung, dan Dosen Bagian Hukum\r\nPidana Fakultas Hukum Universitas Lampung.\r\nHasil penelitian dan pembahasan menunjukan bahwa pertimbangan hakim dalam\r\nmenjatuhkan putusan kasasi pidana mati terhadap pelaku tindak pidana narkotika\r\ndalam Putusan Nomor 5832 K/Pid.Sus/2022 yaitu karena Judex Facti dalam\r\nmenangani perkara a quo telah salah dalam menerapkan hukum terkhusus hukum\r\npembuktian, dimana pencabutan keterangan yang dilakukan oleh saksi di muka\r\npersidangan dijadikan dasar oleh hakim untuk membebaskan terdakwa tanpa\r\nmencari kebenaran materiil pencabutan keterangan tersebut. Kemudian juga\r\nterdapat pertimbangan hakim mengenai hal-hal yang memberatkan terdakwa\r\nyakni bahwa terdakwa merupakan narapidana, perbuatan terdakwa telah\r\nmenghambat program pemerintah memberantas penyalahguna narkotika, dan\r\nterdakwa terlibat jaringan peredaran gelap. Adapun penyebab disparitas antara\r\nPutusan Tingkat Pertama dengan Tingkat Kasasinya yakni Faktor yang bersumber\r\ndari hakim dan faktor teori Ratio Decidendi.\r\nAdapun saran yang diberikan dalam penelitian skripsi ini ialah Majelis hakim\r\ndalam memeriksa suatu perkara tindak pidana khususnya narkotika diharapkan\r\nlebih konsisten dalam mengemban amanat memberantas tindak pidana narkotika.\r\nMahkamah Agung diharapkan dapat memberlakukan penerapan dari sistem kamar\r\nMahkamah Agung secara konsisten, agar permasalahan-permasalahan hukum\r\nyang terhadapnya belum terdapat kesamaan pendapat, dapat terselesaikan\r\nsehingga dapat menjaga kesatuan penerapan hukum, konsistensi putusan, dan\r\nmengurangi disparitas putusan.\r\nKata Kunci: Pertimbangan Hakim, Penjatuhan Putusan, Tindak Pidana\r\nNarkotika.\r\n\r\nThe judge in making a decision must be based on the indictment and everything\r\nthat was proven in the trial examination. The hope is that the judge's decision will\r\nfulfill substantive justice, but there are still many decisions against perpetrators of\r\nnarcotics crimes that are deemed not in accordance with the applicable law. As in\r\nthe case of a narcotics crime which was acquitted at the Tanjung Karang District\r\nCourt with Decision Number: 13/Pid.Sus/2022/PN Tjk, however the Public\r\nProsecutor then filed an appeal of cassation to the Supreme Court. The Supreme\r\nCourt examined the case then overturned the decision of the Judex Facti and\r\njudge the case itself. Based on this case, it is necessary to conduct a research with\r\nproblems: How is the basis of the Judge's legal reasoning in the imposition of a\r\ndeath penalty cassation verdict against a narcotics offender in Decision Number\r\n5832 K/Pid.Sus/2022 and what is the cause of the disparity between the decisions\r\nof Tanjung Karang District Court Number 13/ Pid.Sus/2022/PN Tjk with Supreme\r\nCourt Decision Number 5832 K/Pid.Sus/2022.\r\nThe problem approach used in this thesis uses a normative juridical and empirical\r\njuridical approaches. The data sources used are primary and secondary data. The\r\nresource persons consisted of Judge of Bandar Lampung District Court,\r\nProsecutor of Bandar Lampung District Attorney's Office, and Lecturer of\r\nCriminal Law Department, Faculty of Law, University of Lampung.\r\nThe results of the research and discussion show that the judge's legal reasoning in\r\nimposing a death penalty cassation decision against the perpetrator of a narcotics\r\ncrime in Decision Number 5832 K/Pid.Sus/2022 is because the Judex Facti in\r\nhandling the case a quo had been wrong in applying the law, especially the law of\r\nevidence, where the revocation of testimony made by witnesses in front of the\r\ntrial was used as a basis by the judge to acquit the defendant without seeking the\r\nmaterial truth of the revocation of the testimony. Then there were also\r\nconsiderations by the judge regarding the matters that aggravated the defendant,\r\nnamely that the defendant was a convict, the defendant's actions had hampered \r\ngovernment programs to eradicate narcotics abusers, and the defendant was\r\ninvolved in an illicit trafficking network. The causes of the disparity between the\r\nFirst Level Court Decision and the Cassation Level are factors originating from\r\nthe judge and the Ratio Decidendi theory factor.\r\nThe suggestions given in this thesis research are that the panel of judges in\r\nexamining a criminal case, especially narcotics, is expected to be more consistent\r\nin carrying out the mandate to eradicate narcotics crimes. The Supreme Court is\r\nexpected to be able to apply the application of the Supreme Court chamber system\r\nconsistently, so that legal issues on which there is no common opinion can be\r\nresolved so as to maintain the unity of legal application, consistency of decisions,\r\nand reduce disparity of decisions.\r\nKeywords: Judge's Legal Reasoning, Decision Making, Narcotics Crime."^^ . "2024-05-15" . . . . . "FAKULTAS HUKUM"^^ . . . . . . . "Cathrine\t"^^ . "Vincentia "^^ . "Cathrine\t Vincentia "^^ . . . . . . "ANALISIS PUTUSAN KASASI PIDANA MATI TERHADAP\r\nPELAKU TINDAK PIDANA NARKOTIKA\r\n(Studi Putusan Nomor 5832 K/Pid.Sus/2022) (File PDF)"^^ . . . "ABSTRAK - vincentia cathrine.pdf"^^ . . . "ANALISIS PUTUSAN KASASI PIDANA MATI TERHADAP\r\nPELAKU TINDAK PIDANA NARKOTIKA\r\n(Studi Putusan Nomor 5832 K/Pid.Sus/2022) (File PDF)"^^ . . . "ANALISIS PUTUSAN KASASI PIDANA MATI TERHADAP\r\nPELAKU TINDAK PIDANA NARKOTIKA\r\n(Studi Putusan Nomor 5832 K/Pid.Sus/2022) (File PDF)"^^ . . . "SKRIPSI FULL TANPA PEMBAHASAN - vincentia cathrine.pdf"^^ . . . "ANALISIS PUTUSAN KASASI PIDANA MATI TERHADAP\r\nPELAKU TINDAK PIDANA NARKOTIKA\r\n(Studi Putusan Nomor 5832 K/Pid.Sus/2022) (Other)"^^ . . . . . . "indexcodes.txt"^^ . . . "ANALISIS PUTUSAN KASASI PIDANA MATI TERHADAP\r\nPELAKU TINDAK PIDANA NARKOTIKA\r\n(Studi Putusan Nomor 5832 K/Pid.Sus/2022) (Other)"^^ . . . . . . "ANALISIS PUTUSAN KASASI PIDANA MATI TERHADAP\r\nPELAKU TINDAK PIDANA NARKOTIKA\r\n(Studi Putusan Nomor 5832 K/Pid.Sus/2022) (Other)"^^ . . . . . . "indexcodes.txt"^^ . . . "ANALISIS PUTUSAN KASASI PIDANA MATI TERHADAP\r\nPELAKU TINDAK PIDANA NARKOTIKA\r\n(Studi Putusan Nomor 5832 K/Pid.Sus/2022) (Other)"^^ . . . . . . "lightbox.jpg"^^ . . . "ANALISIS PUTUSAN KASASI PIDANA MATI TERHADAP\r\nPELAKU TINDAK PIDANA NARKOTIKA\r\n(Studi Putusan Nomor 5832 K/Pid.Sus/2022) (Other)"^^ . . . . . . "preview.jpg"^^ . . . "ANALISIS PUTUSAN KASASI PIDANA MATI TERHADAP\r\nPELAKU TINDAK PIDANA NARKOTIKA\r\n(Studi Putusan Nomor 5832 K/Pid.Sus/2022) (Other)"^^ . . . . . . "medium.jpg"^^ . . . "ANALISIS PUTUSAN KASASI PIDANA MATI TERHADAP\r\nPELAKU TINDAK PIDANA NARKOTIKA\r\n(Studi Putusan Nomor 5832 K/Pid.Sus/2022) (Other)"^^ . . . . . . "small.jpg"^^ . . . "ANALISIS PUTUSAN KASASI PIDANA MATI TERHADAP\r\nPELAKU TINDAK PIDANA NARKOTIKA\r\n(Studi Putusan Nomor 5832 K/Pid.Sus/2022) (Other)"^^ . . . . . . "lightbox.jpg"^^ . . . "ANALISIS PUTUSAN KASASI PIDANA MATI TERHADAP\r\nPELAKU TINDAK PIDANA NARKOTIKA\r\n(Studi Putusan Nomor 5832 K/Pid.Sus/2022) (Other)"^^ . . . . . . "preview.jpg"^^ . . . "ANALISIS PUTUSAN KASASI PIDANA MATI TERHADAP\r\nPELAKU TINDAK PIDANA NARKOTIKA\r\n(Studi Putusan Nomor 5832 K/Pid.Sus/2022) (Other)"^^ . . . . . . "medium.jpg"^^ . . . "ANALISIS PUTUSAN KASASI PIDANA MATI TERHADAP\r\nPELAKU TINDAK PIDANA NARKOTIKA\r\n(Studi Putusan Nomor 5832 K/Pid.Sus/2022) (Other)"^^ . . . . . . "small.jpg"^^ . . . "ANALISIS PUTUSAN KASASI PIDANA MATI TERHADAP\r\nPELAKU TINDAK PIDANA NARKOTIKA\r\n(Studi Putusan Nomor 5832 K/Pid.Sus/2022) (Other)"^^ . . . . . . "ANALISIS PUTUSAN KASASI PIDANA MATI TERHADAP\r\nPELAKU TINDAK PIDANA NARKOTIKA\r\n(Studi Putusan Nomor 5832 K/Pid.Sus/2022) (Other)"^^ . . . . . . "ANALISIS PUTUSAN KASASI PIDANA MATI TERHADAP\r\nPELAKU TINDAK PIDANA NARKOTIKA\r\n(Studi Putusan Nomor 5832 K/Pid.Sus/2022) (Other)"^^ . . . . . . "ANALISIS PUTUSAN KASASI PIDANA MATI TERHADAP\r\nPELAKU TINDAK PIDANA NARKOTIKA\r\n(Studi Putusan Nomor 5832 K/Pid.Sus/2022) (Other)"^^ . . . . . "HTML Summary of #82700 \n\nANALISIS PUTUSAN KASASI PIDANA MATI TERHADAP \nPELAKU TINDAK PIDANA NARKOTIKA \n(Studi Putusan Nomor 5832 K/Pid.Sus/2022)\n\n" . "text/html" . . . "340 Ilmu hukum" . .