Pertimbangan Hakim dalam Putusan Ultra Petita Nomor: 3/Pid.Sus-Anak/2024/Pn Pnj terhadap Tindak Pidana Pembunuhan Berencana yang Dilakukan oleh Anak

Yulistia Akbari; Tesya Savita; Sarkawi Sarkawi

doi:10.33019/jph.v3i1.24

Authors

Yulistia Akbari University of Bangka Belitung
Tesya Savita University of Bangka Belitung
Sarkawi Sarkawi University of Bangka Belitung

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.33019/jph.v3i1.24

Keywords:

Child Justice, Judicial Consideration, Premeditated Murder, Ultra Petita

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.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Chanifah, C., Sudarti, E., & Arfa, N. (2023). Ultra petita dalam tindak pidana pemerkosaan. PAMPAS Journal of Criminal Law, 4(1), 33–61. https://doi.org/10.22437/pampas.v4i1.24075

Dewan Perwakilan Rakyat Republik Indonesia. (1981). Undang-Undang Republik Indonesia Nomor 8 Tahun 1981 tentang Hukum Acara Pidana (KUHAP). Lembaran Negara Republik Indonesia Tahun 1981 Nomor 76.

Dewan Perwakilan Rakyat Republik Indonesia. (2009). Undang-Undang Republik Indonesia Nomor 48 Tahun 2009 tentang Kekuasaan Kehakiman. Lembaran Negara Republik Indonesia Tahun 2009 Nomor 157.

Dewan Perwakilan Rakyat Republik Indonesia. (2012). Undang-Undang Republik Indonesia Nomor 11 Tahun 2012 tentang Sistem Peradilan Pidana Anak. Lembaran Negara Republik Indonesia Tahun 2012 Nomor 153.

Faisal, F., & Rahayu, D. P. (2021). Reformulasi syarat diversi: Kajian ide dasar sistem peradilan pidana anak. Masalah-Masalah Hukum, 50(3), 331–338. https://doi.org/10.14710/mmh.50.3.2021.331-338

Harruma, I. (2022, June 7). Apa itu ultra petita? KOMPAS.com. https://nasional.kompas.com/read/2022/06/08/03150011/apa-itu-ultra-petita-?page=all

Kaltim Kece. (n.d.). Berani terobos UU Peradilan Anak demi rasa keadilan, vonis 20 tahun disebut tepat. https://kaltimkece.id/warta/hukum/berani-terobos-uu-peradilan-anak-demi-rasa-keadilan-vonis-20-tahun-disebut-tepat

Koeswadji, H. H. (1995). Perkembangan macam-macam pidana dalam rangka pembangunan hukum pidana. Universitas Airlangga.

Mertokusumo, M. S., & Pitlo, A. (1993). Bab-bab tentang penemuan hukum. Liberty.

Metatags Generator. (n.d.). Legalitas ultra petita dalam hukum acara pidana pada putusan pengadilan. Universitas Tarumanagara. https://journal.untar.ac.id/index.php/adigama/article/view/17125/9157

Parsada, L. R., Sudarti, E., & Arfa, N. (2022). Kebijakan hukum pidana atas tindak pidana penghinaan terhadap presiden dan wakil presiden. PAMPAS Journal of Criminal Law, 3(1), 31–41. https://doi.org/10.22437/pampas.v3i1.17790

Rifai, A. (2010). Penemuan hukum oleh hakim: Dalam perspektif hukum progresif. Sinar Grafika.

Siregar, B. F. (2016). Penulisan hukum/skripsi: Pertimbangan hakim dalam menjatuhkan putusan terhadap residivis pengedar narkotika di Kota Yogyakarta. Universitas Atma Jaya Yogyakarta. http://e-journal.uajy.ac.id/10749/

Sulistyawan, A. Y., & Atmaja, A. F. P. (2021). Urgensi legal reasoning bagi hakim dalam pengambilan putusan di pengadilan untuk menghindari ‘onvoldoende gemotiveerd.’ Jurnal Ius Constituendum, 6(2), 482–500. https://doi.org/10.26623/jic.v6i2.4232

Utami, P. R. (2018). Konsep diversi dan restorative justice sebagai pergeseran tanggung jawab pidana pada sistem peradilan pidana anak. Volksgeist: Jurnal Ilmu Hukum dan Konstitusi, 1(1), 95–106. https://doi.org/10.24090/volksgeist.v1i1.1691

Utrecht, E., & Djindang, S. (1989). Pengantar dalam hukum Indonesia. Ghalia Indonesia. https://ci.nii.ac.jp/ncid/BA75086431