PENALARAN HAKIM TENTANG PENYERTAAN TINDAK PIDANA DALAM KASUS KORUPSI PENGADAAN VIDEOTRON Kajian Putusan Nomor 36/Pid.Sus/TPK/2014/PN.Jkt.Pst

Musa, M. and Susanti, Heni (2022) PENALARAN HAKIM TENTANG PENYERTAAN TINDAK PIDANA DALAM KASUS KORUPSI PENGADAAN VIDEOTRON Kajian Putusan Nomor 36/Pid.Sus/TPK/2014/PN.Jkt.Pst. Jurnal Yudisial, 15 (1). ISSN 2579-4868

Text 6. 529-3190-1-PB.pdf - Published Version Download (306kB)

Abstract

Judges use two concepts of complicity in legal reasoning related to sentence expansion. The first concept expands the punishment of a person (strafausdehnungsgrund), emphasizing a person’s responsibility for complicity. The second concept expands the punishment of an act (tatbestandausdehnungsgrund), viewing it as an offense in complicity. The provisions of the complicity norm in the Criminal Code are a problem in law enforcement of the Anti-Corruption Law because it creates judges’ discretion in implementing the expansion of sentences of complicity. This study discusses the judges’ reasoning on complicity regarding the expansion of sentences of complicity in a corruption case. This study is normative legal research or doctrinal law using secondary data sources, specifically court decisions/case studies of corruption crime in videotron procurement at the Ministry of Cooperatives and Small-Medium Enterprises. The data were verified by interviewing judges, prosecutors, advocates, and legal experts and by conducting a focus group discussion to determine the level of legal synchronization of existing court decisions. The study exhibits two variations of judges’ legal reasoning in determining the expansion of sentences in the decisions on complicity in a corruption case. Judex facti judges’ decisions determine the extension of sentences adhering to the view of expanding punishment for acts. Complicity is perceived as the accomplices’ actions are criminal acts taking the same degree of guilt and punishment. Judex juris judges’ decisions view complicity as a matter of liability to expand a person’s conviction. The judex facti decisions create a disparity of sentences for the accomplices.

Actions (login required)

View Item