Judicial Considerations in the Ultra Petita Verdict Number: 3/Pid.Sus-Anak/2024/PN Pnj on the Crime of Premeditated Murder Committed by a Juvenile

Abstract

This study examines the judicial reasoning behind Decision No. 3/Pid.Sus-Anak/2024/PN Pnj of the Penajam District Court, which is considered to contain elements of ultra petita, particularly in the context of a premeditated murder case committed by a juvenile. As the first legal precedent in Indonesia to sentence a child offender in a manner equivalent to adult sentencing, the central issue explored is the extent to which the judge’s considerations align with the principles of criminal procedural law and child protection. The study is grounded in the need to maintain a balance between safeguarding the rights of child offenders and ensuring justice for victims within Indonesia’s criminal justice system. The findings reveal that the judge rendered an ultra petita decision by imposing a sentence not requested by the public prosecutor. This was justified by the court on the basis of the principles of utility and substantive justice, despite raising controversy in legal practice. This research contributes to the academic discourse on the limits of judicial authority in issuing ultra petita rulings and their implications for the development of juvenile criminal law in Indonesia. It is expected to serve as a reference for strengthening child justice policies that prioritize fairness and the protection of human rights.