Anggraeni, Novia (2019) Analisis Putusan Hakim Nomor 607/PID.B/2015/PN.KAG Pasca Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor 1/PUU-XI/2013 Tentang Perbuatan Tidak Menyenangkan Pasal 335 Ayat (1) Angka 1 Kitab Undang-Undang Hukum Pidana. Sarjana thesis, Universitas Brawijaya.
Abstract
Pada penelitian ini, permasalahan dilatarbelakangi dengan kekaburan hukum, dalam Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor 1/PUU-XI/2013 yang menyatakan frasa ”perbuatan lain maupun perlakuan yang tak menyenangkan”, tidak mempunyai kekuatan hukum mengikat. Terjadi permasalahan dalam Putusan Pengadilan Nomor 607/PID.B/2013/PN.Kag, dasar pertimbangan hakim masih menggunakan unsur frasa “perbuatan lain maupun perlakuan yang tak menyenangkan”, maka rumusan masalahnya adalah Mengapa putusan Nomor 607/PID.B/2015/PN.Kag hakim masih menggunakan unsur perbuatan lain, maupun perlakuan yang tidak menyenangkan Pasal 335 Ayat (1) KUHP? Dan Apa Implikasi yang timbul bila hakim masih menggunakan unsur perlakuan lain maupun perbutan yang tidak menyenangkan Pasal 335 Ayat (1) KUHP? Metode Penelitian yang digunakan jenis penelitian hukum normatif, dengan pendekatan perundang-undangan dan kasus. Bahan hukum yang digunakan bahan hukum primer, sekunder dan tersier. Bahan hukum yang telah diperoleh, dianalisis menggunakan metode penafsiran gramatikal dan sistematis. Hasil pembahasan yang diperoleh yaitu, dasar pertimbangan hakim yang menyatakan pasal 335 Ayat (1) angka 1 KUHP merupakan pasal alternatife kurang tepat, karena setelah dikeluarkannya putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi telah terjadi sebuah pergeseran makna dalam pasal tersebut, sehingga terhadap putusan hakim yang masih menggunakan frasa “perbuatan lain maupun perlakuan yang tak menyenangkan” dapat dilakukan upaya hukum.
English Abstract
The issue studied in this research was initiated by the vague of norm in the Decision of Constitutional Court Number 1/PUU-XI/2013 stating “another act or a bad act”, which does not hold any binding legal force. It is found that there is certainly an issue in the Decision Number 607/PID.B/2013/PN.Kag, where the consideration once made by the judge was still based on the phrase „another act or a bad act‟. The issue leads to the questions why did the judge refer to the „another act or a bad act‟ in Article 335 Paragraph (1) of Criminal Code to make the Decision and what are the implications brought when a judge still refers to the phrase stated in Article 335 Paragraph (1) of Criminal Code? This research employed normative legal research along with statute and case approaches. The data used involved primary, secondary, and tertiary materials. The obtained data was then analysed by means of grammatical and systematic interpretation. The research result reveals that the reference to Article 335 Paragraph (1) point 1 of Criminal Code is deemed as inappropriate alternative article since there has been a change in its meaning of the phrase. Therefore, when the phrase is still referred by the judge to issue a decision, a legal measure can be taken.
| Item Type: | Thesis (Sarjana) |
|---|---|
| Identification Number: | SKR/FH/2019/25/051902715 |
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | perbuatan tidak menyenangkan, putusan mahkamah konstitusi, putusan hakim-bad act, decision by Constitutional Court, Judge‟s Decision |
| Subjects: | 300 Social sciences > 345 Criminal law > 345.02 Criminal offenses > 345.025 6 Specific crimes and classes of crime (Offenses against reputation and honor) |
| Divisions: | Fakultas Hukum > Ilmu Hukum |
| Depositing User: | soegeng sugeng |
| Date Deposited: | 22 Jun 2020 08:24 |
| Last Modified: | 05 Oct 2020 05:05 |
| URI: | http://repository.ub.ac.id/id/eprint/169284 |
Actions (login required)
 |
View Item |