DASAR PERTIMBANGAN HAKIM DALAM MEMBERIKAN VONIS TERHADAP PELAKU TINDAK PIDANA KORUPSI (Studi putusan Nomor 110/Pid.sus-TPK/2018/PN.Bdg Juncto Putusan Nomor 237 PK/Pid.sus/2020)

Abstract

Abstract

Criminal acts that can be applied with this principle are corruption crimes, because for now it has been regulated in the Criminal Code and there is also a separate Law, namely Law Number 20 of 2001 concerning Amendments to Law Number 31 of 1999 concerning the Eradication of Corruption. This kind of thing is done with the aim of correcting any deficiencies or weaknesses regarding the formulation of crimes in the provisions of the previous Law. Although corruption crimes have been regulated by a specific Law, this does not seem to have an effect on the high number of corruption cases in Indonesia. The problem in the Judge's Consideration in Giving a Verdict Against the Perpetrators of Corruption Crimes is that the basic consideration consists of 2 phrases, basic and weighing; in the Indonesian lexicon, the word "basis" can be defined as the basis or main. The phrases "weighing" and "consideration" both refer to one-sidedness, equal weight, and opinion (good or bad). The results of this study indicate that the legal basis for consideration by the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court in Supreme Court Decision Number 237 PK/pid.Sus/2020 is not in accordance with Decision Number 110/Pid.Sus/2018/PN Bdg and Article 263 paragraph 2 of the Criminal Procedure Code, which states that decisions that are proven to be contradictory to one another and the judge's clear errors and mistakes with various considerations that have an impact on reducing the defendant's sentence are not appropriate. So it is not right for the judge to grant the convict's request. Moreover, previously the defendant had committed a repeat of a similar crime, where the repetition of a crime can be subject to increased punishment in the form of additional criminal penalties.

Keywords: Judge's Considerations, Corruption, Bribery

ABSTRAK

Tirndak Pirdana yang dapat dirterrapkan derngan asas irnir iralah tirndak pirdana korupsir, karerna untuk dertirk irnir terlah diratur dalam KUHP dan juga ada Undang-Undang terrserndirrir yaknir Undang-Undang Nomor 20 Tahun 2001 terntang Perrubahan Atas Undang-Undang Nomor 31 Tahun 1999 terntang Permberrantasan Tirndak Pirdana Korupsir. Hal serperrtir irnir dirlakukan derngan tujuan untuk mermperrbairkir sergala kerkurangan atau pun kerlermahan merngernair rumusan derlirk pada kerterntuan Undang-Undang serberlumnya. Walaupun tirndak pirdana korupsir terlah diratur derngan Undang-Undang yang sercara khusus, namun hal terrserbut serakan tirdak berrperngaruh terrhadap tirnggirnya angka kasus korupsir dir Irndonersira.Adapun perrmasalahan dalam Perrtirmbangan Hakirm untuk mermberrirkan Vonirs Terrhadap Perlaku Tirndak Pirdana Korupsir irnir Perrtirmbangan dasar terrdirrir darir 2 frasa dasar dan tirmbang; dalam lerksirkon bahasa Irndonersira, kata "dasar" dapat dirderfirnirsirkan serbagair pangkal aliras pokok. Frasa "mernirmbang" dan "perrtirmbangan" kerduanya merngacu pada berrat serberlah, bobot yang sama, dan perndapat (bairk atau buruk). Hasirl pernerlirtiran irnir mernunjukan dasar perrtirmbangan hukum Olerh Hakirm agung Mahkamah Agung dalam Putusan Mahkamah Agung Nomor 237 PK/pird.Sus/2020 tirdak sersuair derngan Putusan Nomor 110/Pird.Sus/2018/PN Bdg dan pasal 263 ayat 2 KUHAP, yang mernyerbutkan putusan yang terrbuktir terrdapat perrterntangan satu derngan yang lairn dan kerkerlirruan dan kerkhirlafan hakirm yang nyata derngan berrbagair perrtirmbangannya yang berrdampak pada perngurangan hukuman terrdakwa tirdak terpat. Serhirngga tirdak terpat terpat hakirm merngakbulkan perrmohonan terrpirdana. Apalagir serberlumnya terrdakwa terlah merlakukan perngulangan tirndak pirdana yang serrupa, dirmana perngulangan tirndak pirdana dapat dirkernakan permberratan hukuman berrupa pirdana tambahan.

Kata kunci: Perrtirmbangan Hakirm, Tirndak Pirdana Korupsi, Suap