Regulation of Criminal Act in Positive Criminal Law in Indonesia

Oct 13, 2025 by ludoplayers7.com 132 views

Introduction

In the realm of criminal law, crimes related to lives, such as murder and persecution that cause death, are examples of forms of crime that are still prevalent. The judge, as an authorized official to try criminal cases, often faces significant challenges, especially in terms of consistency of decisions. Disparity in judges' considerations can lead to injustice in law enforcement, which has the potential to influence the final decision taken. This article aims to analyze the disparity of judges' considerations in proof of the crime of murder and criminal acts of persecution resulting in death, using the decisions of the District Court Number 151/Pid.B/2016/PN SIM and Number 407/PID.B/2016/PN TJB as case studies.

Regulation of Criminal Act in Positive Criminal Law in Indonesia

The regulation regarding the crime of murder is regulated in detail in the Criminal Code (KUHP), starting from Article 338 to Article 359. Meanwhile, criminal acts of persecution are also regulated in the Criminal Code, especially in Article 351 to Article 355, and Article 358 and Article 360. This regulation provides a legal basis for various criminal acts that can occur in the community. In addition, there are special laws such as Law Number 35 of 2014 concerning Child Protection, which regulates the persecution of children, as well as Law Number 23 of 2004 concerning the Elimination of Domestic Violence.

The Importance of Consistency in Judges' Decisions

Consistency in judges' decisions is crucial in maintaining the integrity of the legal system. When judges make decisions based on different considerations, it can lead to a lack of trust in the justice system. The public may perceive the justice system as biased or unfair, which can have serious consequences for the community. Therefore, it is essential to ensure that judges make decisions based on a thorough understanding of the law and the facts of the case.

Disparity of Judges' Considerations in Case Decisions

The two decisions that became the focus of the analysis, namely the decision of the District Court Number 151/Pid.B/2016/PN SIM and the decision of the District Court Number 407/Pid.B/2016/PN TJB, showed the disparity in the judge's consideration. This disparity does not only affect criminalization, but also has the potential to worsen public trust in the justice system. In the first case, the judge may consider certain factors that result in a lighter decision, whereas in the second case, the same factor may not be taken into account in the same way, resulting in a heavier decision.

Factors Influencing Judges' Considerations

The quality of evidence submitted, facts in the field, and the social context of each case become a determining factor in the judge's consideration. Some judges may be influenced by personal background, social view, or even public pressure in making decisions. Therefore, it is essential for law enforcers to try to maintain consistency and objectivity in providing decisions.

Additional Analysis and Explanation

The phenomenon of disparity in the consideration of this judge can be traced more deeply through the normative law approach and literature research. The disparity in judges' considerations can be attributed to various factors, including the quality of evidence submitted, the facts in the field, and the social context of each case. Additionally, personal background, social view, and public pressure may also influence judges' considerations.

The Need for Judicial Reform

Disparity in the decision can damage the foundation of social and legal justice. This shows the need for efforts to improve the judicial system, including training and better education for judges regarding how to assess evidence and apply legal norms fairly. In the long run, this will benefit the community and strengthen the integrity of the legal system.

Conclusion

In law enforcement, especially in the crime of murder and persecution that results in death, disparity in judges' considerations is still a significant challenge. Through an analysis of the decision of the District Court Number 151/Pid.B/2016/PN SIM and Number 407/PID.B/2016/PN TJB, it can be seen how the difference in judge's consideration can affect the results of a case. Therefore, efforts to increase consistency and justice in the judge's decision need to be a priority in the reform of the justice system in Indonesia.

Recommendations for Future Research

Future research should focus on identifying the root causes of disparity in judges' considerations and developing strategies to address these issues. Additionally, research should be conducted to evaluate the effectiveness of judicial reform efforts in improving consistency and justice in judges' decisions.

Limitations of the Study

This study has several limitations. Firstly, the analysis was based on only two case studies, which may not be representative of the broader issue of disparity in judges' considerations. Secondly, the study did not examine the impact of disparity in judges' considerations on the community. Future research should aim to address these limitations and provide a more comprehensive understanding of the issue.

Implications for Policy and Practice

The findings of this study have significant implications for policy and practice. Firstly, policymakers should prioritize judicial reform efforts to improve consistency and justice in judges' decisions. Secondly, judges should receive training and education on how to assess evidence and apply legal norms fairly. Finally, law enforcers should strive to maintain consistency and objectivity in providing decisions.

Future Directions for Research

Q: What is the significance of consistency in judges' decisions?

A: Consistency in judges' decisions is crucial in maintaining the integrity of the legal system. When judges make decisions based on different considerations, it can lead to a lack of trust in the justice system. The public may perceive the justice system as biased or unfair, which can have serious consequences for the community.

Q: What are the factors that influence judges' considerations?

A: The quality of evidence submitted, facts in the field, and the social context of each case become a determining factor in the judge's consideration. Some judges may be influenced by personal background, social view, or even public pressure in making decisions.

Q: What are the consequences of disparity in judges' considerations?

A: Disparity in the decision can damage the foundation of social and legal justice. This shows the need for efforts to improve the judicial system, including training and better education for judges regarding how to assess evidence and apply legal norms fairly.

Q: How can disparity in judges' considerations be addressed?

A: Efforts to increase consistency and justice in the judge's decision need to be a priority in the reform of the justice system in Indonesia. This can be achieved through training and education for judges, as well as the implementation of policies that promote consistency and fairness in the justice system.

Q: What is the role of law enforcers in maintaining consistency and objectivity in providing decisions?

A: Law enforcers should strive to maintain consistency and objectivity in providing decisions. This can be achieved by ensuring that all cases are handled in a fair and impartial manner, and that decisions are based on a thorough understanding of the law and the facts of the case.

Q: How can the public contribute to promoting consistency and fairness in the justice system?

A: The public can contribute to promoting consistency and fairness in the justice system by being aware of their rights and responsibilities, and by reporting any instances of bias or unfairness in the justice system.

Q: What are the implications of disparity in judges' considerations for the community?

A: Disparity in judges' considerations can have serious consequences for the community, including a lack of trust in the justice system and a perception that the justice system is biased or unfair.

Q: How can disparity in judges' considerations be evaluated?

A: Disparity in judges' considerations can be evaluated through research and analysis of case studies, as well as through the implementation of policies and programs that promote consistency and fairness in the justice system.

Q: What are the recommendations for future research on disparity in judges' considerations?

A: Future research should focus on identifying the root causes of disparity in judges' considerations and developing strategies to address these issues. Additionally, research should be conducted to evaluate the effectiveness of judicial reform efforts in improving consistency and justice in judges' decisions.

Q: What are the limitations of this study on disparity in judges' considerations?

A: This study has several limitations, including the analysis being based on only two case studies, which may not be representative of the broader issue of disparity in judges' considerations. Additionally, the study did not examine the impact of disparity in judges' considerations on the community.

Q: What are the implications of this study for policy and practice?

A: The findings of this study have significant implications for policy and practice, including the need for judicial reform efforts to improve consistency and justice in judges' decisions, as well as the importance of training and education for judges on how to assess evidence and apply legal norms fairly.