Abstract

Different conviction or disparity of sentencing in judges discretionary form at imposing of judgment for making a decision. This case impacts disappointment for the general public and especially for conviction. This research purposes to know the rule of sentencing disparity on criminal law in Indonesia. Furthermore, some factor sentencing disparity happened in the article No. 113/Pid.Sus/2020/PN.Tsm and article No. 114/Pid.Sus/2020/PN.Tsm in narcotic crime case at Tasikmalaya. This research uses a normative juridical method done through literature study that analyzes secondary data in the form of laws and regulation, legal document, the result of research, assessment of result and others reference through interview. This study's results are: 1) The rule of disparity of sentencing criminal procedural law in Indonesia list in article 197 KUHP, judges must consider determining strafmaat for defendant through material evidence at trial to support the conclusion considerate of judges. There is a limit of judges to deciding cases that regulate in article 183 KUHAP. 2) Factor of sentencing disparity in the article No. 113/Pid.Sus/2020/PN.Tsm and article No. 114/Pid.Sus/2020/PN.Tsm in narcotic crime case, there is other evidence from each defendant that makes the basis of consideration is different. However, the defendant's role in committing a crime was some in the article No. 35 Tahun 2009 about Narcotic regarding provisions of the crime. The researcher suggests that when judges decide the matter that contained disparity of sentencing, accordingly, it must rely on objective consideration.

Keywords: Disparity of Sentencing, Conviction, Narcotic.

There is no Figure or data content available for this article

References

• A Raharjo, T Sudrajat, RW Bintoro, Y Saefudin, The sinking ship policy to the perpetrator of illegal, unregulated and unreported fishing in criminal law perspective. E3S Web of Conferences 47, 06002

  Anggraeny, Kurnia Dewi, “Disparitas Pidana Dalam Putusan Hakim Terhadap Tindak Pidana Psikotropika Di Pengadilan Negeri Sleman”, Jurnal Hukum Novelty, 7(2), (2016): 225-236.

  Asep Maulana. “Disparitas Putusan Hakim Dalam Memutuskan Sebuah Perkara Tindak Pidana Narkoba”. Skripsi. Jakarta: UIN Syarif Hidayatullah; Fakultas Syari’ah Dan Hukum, 2006.

  Bertin. “Analisis Disparitas Pidana Dalam Kasus Pemerkosaan”. e Jurnal Katalogis, Vol. 4 (11), 2010.

  Bhakti, Rizky Atswari, etc. “Disparitas Pidana Dalam Putusan Hakim Di Pengadilan Negeri Semarang Terhadap Tindak Pidana Pembunuhan”. Jurnal Diponegoro Law Journal, 6(4), 2017.

  Binsar Gultom in Indonesia Corruption Watch, concerning “Kualitas Putusan Hakim Harus didukung Masyarakat, ”http://www.antikorupsi.org/id/content/kualitas-putusan-hakim harus-didukung-masyarakat, accessed on 10 September 2020.

  Criminal Procedure Code

  Deliani. “Prisonisasi dan Masalahnya dalam Sistem Pemasyarakatan”. Jurnal Non Eksakta- HEKSPI, Vol. 2 (2), 2010.

  Gulo, Nimerodi etc. “Disparitas Dalam Penjatuhan Pidana”. Jurnal Masalah-Masalah Hukum, Vol. 47 (3), (2018): 215-227.

  H Pascarina, Y Saefudin, Legal Text Translation: Translation Quality of HLA Hart’s the Concept of Law, 3rd International Conference on Globalization of Law and Local Wisdom (ICGLOW 2019).

  Harkrisnowo, Harkristuti, “Rekonstruksi Konsep Pemidanaan; Suatu gugatan Terhadap Proses Legislagi dan Pemidanaan di Indonesia”, Teks Pidato Pada Upacara Pengukuhan Guru Besar tetap Dalam Ilmu Hukum Pidana, Fakultas Hukum Universitas Indonesia, di Balai Sidang Universitas Indonesia. 2003.

  Hasibuan, Devy Iryanthy etc, “Disparitas Pemidanaan Terhadap Pelaku Tindak Pidana Narkotika”, Jurnal USU Law Journal, 3(1), (2015): 87-100,.

  Huda, Chairul. Dari ‘Tiada Pidana Tanpa Kesalahan’ Menuju Kepada Tiada Pertanggungjawaban Pidana Tanpa Kesalahan’: Tinjauan Kritis Terhadap Teori Pemisahan Tindak Pidana dan Pertanggungjawaban Pidana”. Jakarta: Kencana Prenada Media Group,2006.

  Irianto, Berliandista Yustianjarnimas. “Disparitas Pidana Pada Penyalahguna Narkotika”. Jurnal Jurist Diction, Vol. 3 (3), (2020): 823-840.

  Law Number 35 of 2009 concerning Narcotics

  Law Number 48 of 2009 concerning Judicial Power

  Marzuki, Peter Mahmud.Penelitian Hukum. Jakarta: Kencana Pranada Media, 2010.

  Moeljatno. Azas-Azas Hukum Pidana. Jakarta: Rineka Cipta,1993.

  Muladi, Arief, etc. Teori-teori dan kebijakan Pidana. Bandung: Alumni.2005.

  Mustofa, Wildan Suyuthi. Kode Etik Hakim. Jakarta: Prenadamedia Group, 2013.

  MYS, concerning “Disparitas Putusan Dan Pemidanaan Yang Tidak Proporsional”, https://www.hukumonline.com/berita/baca/lt524a2ce258cb5/disparitas-putusan- dan pemidanaan-yang-tidak-proporsional?page=all, accessed on 19 October 2020.

  N Huda, Y Saefuddin, SW Gumira, S Sumarji, Asesmen Terpadu: Penerapan Restorative Justice Penanggulangan Kejahatan Narkotika Di Indonesia, Jurnal Ilmiah Kebijakan Hukum 14 (1), 111-124.

  Naim, Muhammad, “Proporsionalitas dalam Penjatuhan Pidana Terkait Adanya Disparitas Pidana Dalam Perkara Narkotika”, Jurnal Hukum Legal Standing, Vol. 2 (1), 2018.

  Saefudin, Y., Hartiwingingsih, Isharyanto, Pascarina. Universal defense strategy as the effort of fighting against the misuse and the illicit trafficking of narcotics in Indonesia. International Journal of Advanced Science and Technology 29 (18), 1312-1318

  Soekanto, Soerjono, etc. “Penelitian Hukum Normatif”, Raja Grafindo Persada, Jakarta, 2001.

  Sudarto, “Hukum Pidana I, Semarang”: Yayasan Sudarto dan Fakultas Hukum UNDIP Semarang, Cet ke- II,1990.

  The 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia

  Weda, Made Darma. Kronik dalam Penegakan Hukum Pidana. Jakarta: Candima Metropole,1999.

  Wijayanto, Indung. “Disparitas Pidana Dalam Perkara Tindak Pidana Pencurian Biasa Di Pengadilan Negeri Kota Semarang”. Jurnal Ilmiah Ilmu Hukum QISTIE, Vol.7 (1), 2014.

  Y Saefudin, Rehabilitation Policy for Drugs Abuse in Indonesia. Indian Journal of Forensic Medicine & Toxicology 14 (4).

  Yesmil, Anwar etc. Sistem Peradilan Pidana. Bandung: Widya Padjajaran. 2009.

How to Cite This

Article Metrics

Download Statistics

Other Statistics

Copyright and Permissions

Authors who publish this journal agree to the following terms:

1. Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgment of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
2. Authors can separately make additional contractual arrangements for non-exclusive distribution published by the journal (e.g., publish it in a book), with an acknowledgment of its initial publication in this journal.
3. Authors are allowed and encouraged to send their work via online (e.g., in the institutional repositories or their website) after published by the journal.

Data Availability