PERBANDINGAN PUTUSAN HAKIM PIDANA TERHADAP TERDAKWA KASUS PEMELIHARAAN SATWA YANG DILINDUNGI AKIBAT ERROR JURIS

Abstract

The purpose of this study is to analyze how the Modus Operandi of Keeping Protected Animals in Judge Decision Number 286/Pid.sus/2024/Pn.Mlg. and Decision Number 806/Pid.sus/2024/Pn.Dps. To analyze what is the basis for the Judge's consideration in giving an acquittal verdict and a conviction verdict against the defendant who is proven to have carried out the maintenance of animals protected by law. The method used is normative legal research, the materials used are secondary, primary and tertiary legal materials. The results of the study Piyono kept alligator fish since 2008 which was obtained by buying at the splendid market, while I Nyoman Sukena kept hedgehogs starting with his brother-in-law in Ladang finding 2 (two) hedgehogs that were still small, the consideration of the judge in imposing punishment in Decision Number 286/Pid.Sus/2024/Pn. mlg, against the defendant Piyono, namely that his actions fulfilled the element “intentionally”, while in Decision Number 806/Pid.Sus/2024/Pn.Dps. stated that the subjective requirements of the unlawful nature were not fulfilled. With the conclusions obtained, it turns out that the fish is a dangerous fish, and it turns out that the porcupine is a protected animal, the judge sentenced the defendant Piyono, and then the judge acquitted the defendant I Nyoman Sukena.   

Keywords: Acquittal; Criminal Charges; Error Juris; Maintenance; Protected Animals