Rahman, Reza Hendrawan (2025) Analisis Hukum Terhadap Putusan Hakim Lebih Ringan Dari Tuntutan Jaksa Penuntut Umum Di Bawah Batas Minimum Ancaman Pidana Berdasarkan Pasal 114 Ayat (1) Undang-Undang Narkotika. Masters thesis, Universitas Islam Riau.

Text skripsi_231022114_watermark.pdf - Submitted Version Restricted to Registered users only Download (3MB) | Request a copy

Abstract

The background of this research is the phenomenon where judges often give verdicts below the minimum limit of criminal threats that have been set by law, even though the public prosecutor has filed charges in accordance with the provisions of the applicable law. This raises questions about the basis of the judge's consideration in making the decision and whether the decision is in accordance with the principles of justice and legal certainty. The formulation of the problem is what are the legal consequences for judges who impose a verdict below the minimum limit of criminal threats based on Article 114 paragraph (1) of the Narcotics Law and what is the legal basis for the judge's consideration in imposing a verdict Number 158/PID Sus/2024/PN Bls) below the minimum limit of criminal threats based on Article 114 paragraph (1) of the Narcotics Law. This study uses a normative legal research method that is descriptive and analytical. Through the statute approach and the case approach, this study analyzes the judge's decision that is lighter than the public prosecutor's demands and is below the minimum limit of criminal threats based on Article 114 Paragraph (1) of the Narcotics Law. The data used are secondary data consisting of primary, secondary, and tertiary legal materials The results of the study show that the judge's decision below the minimum limit of criminal threats based on Article 114 Paragraph (1) of the Narcotics Law has the potential to violate the principle of legal certainty and the principle of lex certa, which can reduce the deterrent effect and create inconsistencies in law enforcement. Although the judge may consider the humanitarian factor and the condition of the defendant, the decision must be aligned with the purpose of the Narcotics Law to protect the public from the dangers of narcotics. Strict supervision, increased understanding of judges, and enforcement of legal discipline are needed to maintain the integrity of the judicial system and the effectiveness of narcotics eradication. In Decision Number 158/Pid Sus/2024/PN Bls, the judge imposed a sentence below the minimum limit of Article 114 Paragraph (1) of the Narcotics Law, which should contain a minimum prison sentence of 5 years and a maximum of 20 years and a fine of at least 1 billion and a maximum of 10 billion. The judge considers the factors of the defendant's condition, his role, as well as aspects of justice and humanity, so as to apply the principle of criminal individualization. Although this shows flexibility in adjusting the sentence, the ruling raises pros and cons regarding the consistency of law enforcement.

Actions (login required)

View Item