DISPARITAS PUTUSAN HAKIM DALAM TINDAK PIDANA MUTILASI TERHADAP ANAK (STUDI KASUS PUTUSAN PENGADILAN NEGERI SIAK NOMOR 05/PIDSUS.ANAK/2014/PN.SIAK DAN PUTUSAN PENGADILAN TINGGI PEKANBARU NOMOR 01/PIDSUS ANAK/2014/PT/PBR
ABSTRACT: Since human beings
are born into the world in need of food, clothing, shelter to pursue his life.
In his life, humans are surrounded various kinds of crimes thatthreaten its
interests. The number of crimes that occur can make people restless including
mutilation a criminal offense where the victim had been killed, cut his body
into pieces and parts of his body were sold to butchers and claimed that themeat
sold is animal flesh. The purpose of this study was to determine the basicconsiderations
Siak District Court No. 05 / PIDSUS.ANAK / 2014 / PN.Siak indeciding the case
in the Siak mutilation a criminal offense and to know the basic consideration
High Court judge Pekanbaru No. 01 / PIDSUS ANAK / 2014 / PT /PBR in deciding
criminal cases mutilation in Siak and ideally To find courtdecisions in
criminal cases mutilation in Siak thus Neither the defendant nor thevictim get
the justice of the law. This study uses normative juridical approach, namely by
reviewing legislation, legal theories related to the issues discussed as well
as the legal synchronization approach.The data used is secondary data, namely:
data support the completeness of the information or support the Primary Data
obtained from libraries and library collections author conducted by way of
literature or literature. Results of this study is that in deciding the case, a
judge should pay attention to things or kaedah seadilnya properly and without
any political interests, private interests that could harm either party. In the
case of mutilation is a criminal offense, a defendant initials DP who were aged
16 (sixteen) were only asked to wrap the body parts into plastic to be sold and
at the time of the defendant's actions in a forcedposition which inevitably
have to perform such actions as it gets which can eliminate the threat of his
life. When tried in a state court siak, the defendant was sentenced to ten
years in prison by a district court judge siak. It is indeed very unfair to the
defendant because of the judge's decision is too heavy especially theaccused
was 16 years old and the next generation of the family. Therefore, the defendant
and the attorney and the public prosecutor to appeal, and in the high court,
after notice and look based on facts, evidence and witness testimony in the trial,
pekanbaru high court judge acquitted the accused. Therefore capabilities, status
and dignity as well as his dignity restored.
Penulis: Andreas Cassiga
Tampubolon
Kode Jurnal: jphukumdd151182
