CD Skripsi

Disparitas Putusan Hakim Dalam Tindak Pidana Korupsi

---

Abstract
One of the problems in handling corruption cases is the emergence of criminal disparities in
terms of punishment. The source of the problem is the judge's decision. Judicial power as a free and
independent state power on the one hand has a very positive impact on law enforcement efforts in
Indonesia. In this case, the judge becomes an independent body and its decision cannot be
influenced by other bodies or powers. But on the other hand, the freedom of judges in making their
decisions also has a negative impact, namely the emergence of criminal disparities, such as in the
case decision Number :16 /Pid.Sus/TKP/2017/PN.Sby, Number: 126 /Pid.Sus-
TKP/2015/PN.JKT.PST and Number: 49/Pid.Sus/TPK/2019/PN.JKT.PST? Based on these
problems, the writer is interested in knowing first, How is the comparison of the judge's decision in
the case of the case decision Number :16 /Pid.Sus/TKP/2017/PN.Sby, Number: 126 /Pid.Sus-
TKP/2015/PN.JKT.PST and Number: 49/Pid.Sus/ TPK/2019/PN.JKT.PST? Second, what are the
factors causing the disparity of judges' decisions in corruption cases?
This type of research is classified as normative legal research with the type of legal
principles. In normative legal research, the data source is secondary data consisting of
primary legal materials, secondary legal materials and tertiary legal materials. The
collection of normative legal research data uses data collection techniques using library
research. The data obtained through the literature study will be analyzed qualitatively. In
drawing conclusions, the author uses a deductive method of thinking, namely a way of
thinking that draws conclusions from a general statement or proposition into a specific
statement.
Based on the results of research and discussion, it can be concluded. First; criminal disparity
in cases Number :16 /Pid.Sus/TKP/2017/PN.Sby, Number: 126 /Pid.Sus-TKP/2015/PN.JKT.PST
and Number: 49/Pid.Sus/TPK/2019/PN.JKT.PST? does not only occur in the same criminal act,
but also at the level of seriousness of a criminal act, and also from the judge's decision, both by one
panel of judges and by different judges for the same case. The indication can be seen from the
difference in the quantity of sentencing for cases whose elements and levels of seriousness can be
compared. In addition, the comparison of the amount of state losses in cases of criminal acts of
corruption which is directly proportional to the number of penalties imposed for similar corruption
cases can be an indicator of the occurrence of criminal disparities in corruption cases. Second,
there are several factors that cause criminal disparities, especially in corruption, including the
legal system factor, in the Indonesian legal system, one of the factors that can cause criminal
disparities is the absence of sentencing guidelines for judges in imposing crimes and factors
originating from the judge himself, the judge has very broad freedom to choose the type of criminal
(stafsoort) he wants, in connection with the use of an alternative system of criminal threats in the
law. The position of the judiciary as a noble profession (officium nobile) is strong and has its own
authority without any intervention from other powers. Article 24 paragraph 1 of the 1945
Constitution CHAPTER IX states that "judicial power is an independent power to administer
justice to uphold law and justice".
Keywords: Decision Disparity - Crime - Corruption

---

Ketersediaan

Informasi Detail

Judul Seri

-

No. Panggil

09 04. 121 (0194)

Penerbit

Pekanbaru : Universitas Riau – Fakultas HUKUM – HUKUM PIDANA., 2021

Deskripsi Fisik

ix, 79 hlm.; ill.: 29 cm

Bahasa

Indonesia

ISBN/ISSN

-

Klasifikasi

09 04. 121 (0194)

Tipe Isi

-

Tipe Media

-

Tipe Pembawa

-

Edisi

-

Subjek

HUKUM PIDANA

Info Detail Spesifik

-

Pernyataan Tanggungjawab

Daus

Versi lain/terkait

Lampiran Berkas

Komentar

---

Anda harus masuk sebelum memberikan komentar