Dermawan, Michael Bayu (2018) Disparitas Putusan Tindak Pidana Perkosaan (Studi Putusan Nomor 20/Pid.B/2017/Pn Mrh Dan Putusan Nomor 42/Pid/2017/Pt Bjm). Sarjana thesis, Universitas Brawijaya.
Abstract
Pada skripsi ini, penulis mengangkat permasalahan disparitas putusan tindak pidana perkosaan antara Putusan Nomor 20/Pid.B/2017/PN Mrh dan Putusan Nomor 42/PID/2017/PT BJM. Pilihan tema tersebit dilatarbelakangi adanya perbedaan putusan yang signifikan dimulai dari Pengadilan Negeri Marabahan Nomor 20/Pid.B/2017/PN Mrh yang memvonis Terdakwa sebagai pelaku tindak pidana perkosaan namun dalam putusan Banding Pengadilan Tinggi Banjarmasin Nomor 42/PID/2017/PT BJM Terdakwa dinyatakan bebas serta. Berdasarkan hal tersebut diatas, karya tulis ini mengangkat rumusan masalah: (1) Apa pertimbangan hakim dalam menjatuhkan putusan pemidanaan dalam putusan nomor 20/Pid.B/2017/PN Mrh? (2) Apa pertimbangan hakim dalam menjatuhkan putusan bebas dalam putusan nomor 42/PID/2017/PT BJM? (3) Apa penyebab terjadinya disparitas dalam putusan nomor 20/Pid.B/2017/PN Mrh dan putusan nomor 42/PID/2017/PT BJM? Kemudian penulisan karya tulis ini menggunakan metode yuridis-normatif dengan metode pendekatan undang-undang (statue approach) dan pendekatan kasus (case approach), jenis data primer, sekunder yang diperoleh akan dianalisis dengan menggunakan teknik analisis yuridis-normatif yaitu dengan melihat perundangundangan, putusan pengadilan, literature, jurnal, skripsi, yang dijadikan rujukan dalam menyelesaikan permasalahan hukum yang menjadi obyek kajian. Dari hasil penelitian dengan metode diatas, penulis memperoleh jawaban atas permasalahan yang ada, yaitu: (1) Pertimbangan Hakim Pengadilan Negeri Marabahan Nomor 20/Pid.B/2017/PN Mrh: a. Terbuktinya unsur memaksa dengan cara ancaman kekerasan, b. Terbuktinya unsur wanita diluar perkawinan, c. Terbuktinya unsur bersetubuh, d. Terbuktinya unsur turut serta melakukan, e. Terbuktinya unsur perbuatan berlanjut. (2) Pertimbangan Hakim Pengadilan Tinggi Banjarmasin Nomor 42/PID/2017/PT BJM: a. Tidak terbuktinya unsur kekerasan, b. Tidak terbuktinya unsur bersetubuh, c. Tidak terbuktinya unsur turut serta melakukan. (3) Penyebab terjadinya disparitas putusan: a. Perbedaan penafsiran unsur ancaman kekerasan atau kekerasan, b. Perbedaan penafsiran unsur bersetubuh, c. Perbedaan penafsiran unsur turut serta melakukan
English Abstract
The study discussed the disparity of judge’s decision on the case of rape crime between judge’s decision number 20/Pid.B/2017/PN Mrh and number 42/PID/2017/PT BJM. Researcher choose this case because in this case have a contradiction decision on General Court of Marabahan No. 20/Pid.B/2017/PN Mrh defendant sentenced guilty. But in decision of High Court of Banjarmasin No. 42/PID/2017/PT BJM defendant sentenced not guilty. The research problems formulated in this study is: (1) Is the judge's consideration in deciding the defendant sentenced guilty of judge’s decision no. 20/Pid.B/2017/PN Mrh? (2) Is the judge's consideration in deciding the defendant sentenced not guilty of judge’s decision no. 42/PID/2017/PT BJM? (3) What is the cause of the disparity of the judge's decision no. 20/Pid.B/2017/PN Mrh and no. 42/PID/2017/PT BJM? This study employed yuridism-normatif method with statue approach and case approach, the primary and secondary data was obtained will be analyzed with yuridisnormatif analysis technique that is by looking for the decision, law literature, journal, thesis as reference to resolve this study. Researcher obtained results from the method was used, the author ot the answer on the problems that exist, such as : (1) The judge's consideration on decision no. 20/Pid.B/2017/PN Mrh is: a. Element of pressure with force threat is proved. b. Element of woman outside marriage is proved. c. Element of have sexual intercourse is proved. d. Element of participate in act is proved. e. Element of continued act is proved. (2) The judge's consideration on decision no. 42/PID/2017/PT BJM is: a. Element of force is not proved. b. Element of have sexual intercourse is not proved. c. Element of participate in act is not proved. (3) Cause of the disparity of the judge's decision: a. Differences interpretation element of force threat or force. b. Differences interpretation element of have sexual intercourse. c. Differences interpretation element of participate in act
| Item Type: | Thesis (Sarjana) |
|---|---|
| Identification Number: | SKR/FH/2018/326/051807367 |
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | Pidana Perkosaan, Putusan, Disparitas |
| Subjects: | 300 Social sciences > 345 Criminal law > 345.02 Criminal offenses > 345.025 3 Specific crimes and classes of crime (Sex offenses) > 345.025 32 Specific crimes and classes of crime (Rape) |
| Divisions: | Fakultas Hukum > Ilmu Hukum |
| Depositing User: | soegeng sugeng |
| Date Deposited: | 18 Dec 2018 02:03 |
| Last Modified: | 23 Oct 2021 06:16 |
| URI: | http://repository.ub.ac.id/id/eprint/14079 |
Preview |
Text
Michael Bayu Dermawan.pdf Download (1MB) | Preview |
Actions (login required)
 |
View Item |