JUDGE DISPARITY IN IMPOSING SANCTIONS AGAINST JUSTICE COLLABORATORS Case Study of Decision Number 1031/Pid.B/2022/Pn.Mks and Decision Number 798/Pid.B/2022/Pn.Jkt.Sel
Universitas Bhayangkara Surabaya
Universitas Bhayangkara Surabaya
Universitas Bhayangkara Surabaya
Universitas Bhayangkara Surabaya
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.56943/jssh.v3i4.648Premeditated murders are quite challenging to obtain additional statements as there are generally no witnesses at the crime scene. However, the perpetrators have already planned to eliminate possible witnesses. Therefore, the role of the perpetrator’s witness (justice collaborator) is very important in the investigation process and court decision. According to the Criminal Code, the legal subject of the case is a “person” (for example, in article 340 of the Criminal Code, it is referred to as “anyone,” which means a specific individual). This research aims to understand the role of justice collaborators in sanction decisions by judges and analyze the differences in judges’ decisions through a study of two decisions: 103/Pid.B/2022/Pn.Mks and 798/Pid.B/2022/Pn.Jkt.Sel. This research used normative approach, relying on secondary data such as laws, court decisions, and legal theories. This research showed that there is no specific regulation on sanctions for a justice collaborator (witness who cooperates with law enforcement) in Indonesia. Judges have the flexibility to consider the sanctions imposed on justice collaborators, so there are often differences in punishment even though the offenses are the same. Justice collaborators get an advantage in law if they help law enforcement officials solve criminal cases.
Keywords: Judge Disparity Justice Collaborators Sanctions
Fardiansyah, A. I. (2021). Why Indonesia maintain capital punishment? FIAT JUSTISIA: Jurnal Ilmu Hukum, 15(1), 25–38.
Gulo, N., & Muharram, A. K. (2018). Disparitas dalam Penjatuhan Pidana. In Masalah-Masalah Hukum (pp. 215–227).
Henry, E., & Wibowo, A. (2018). Disparitas Putusan Hakim dalam Menjatuhkan Pidana pada Tindak Pidana Narkotika. UNES: Journal of Swara Justisia, 2(1).
Ibrahim, J. (2015). Teori dan Metodologi Penelitian Hukum Normatif. Bayumedia Publishing.
Khairi, H. Al. (2022). Disparitas Pertimbangan Hakim dalam Penjatuhan Hukuman terhadap Pelaku Tindak Pidana Korupsi Penyalahgunaan Dana Desa (Studi Putusan Nomor: 77/Pid.Sus-TPK/2019/PN Bna dan Putusan Nomor 52/Pid.Sus-TPK/2021/PN Bna). Universitas Islam Negeri Ar-Raniry Banda Aceh.
Lamintang, P. A. F., & Lamintang, F. T. (2014). Dasar-Dasar Hukum Pidana di Indonesia. Sinar Grafika.
Mangare, P. (2016). Kajian Hukum Tindak Pidana Pembunuhan Anak oleh Ibu Kandungnya (Menurut Pasal 134 KUHP). Lex Privatum, 4(2), 82–91.
Marzuki, P. M. (2016). Penelitian Hukum Edisi Revisi. Kencana.
Mertokusumo, S. (2014). Penemuan hukum: sebuah pengantar. Cahaya Atma Pustaka.
Nurasiah, M., Harefa, B., & Waruwu, R. P. R. (2022). Disparitas Pidana terhadap Justice Collaborator dalam Tindak Pidana Korupsi. Jurnal Esensi Hukum, 4(1).
Rasyid, L. M., & Herinawati. (2015). Pengantar Hukum Acara Perdata. Unimal Press.
Soekanto, S., & Mamudji, S. (2015). Penelitian hukum normatif : suatu tinjauan singkat. Rajawali Pers.
Suisno. (2014). Keterangan Saksi Via Teleconference dalam Pembuktian Perkara Pidana di Indonesia. Jurnal Independent, 2(1).
Yusmadi. (2024). Faktor Terjadinya Disparitas terhadap Penjatuhan Sanksi Pidana. Jurnal Tahqiqa, 18(1).
