DISPARITAS PUTUSAN PENGADILAN TIPIKOR PADANG MENGENAI PIDANA DENDA TERHADAP PELAKU TINDAK PIDANA KORUPSI
Abstract
ABSTRACT
Â
Article 1 of Law Number 48 Year 2009 concerning Judicial Power states that Judges are free from any pressure in giving their decisions. One form is that judges use their power by imposing disparity in criminal proceedings. Judges in imposing criminal fines against perpetrators of corruption there are disparities in imposing fines, namely in the case of Criminal Number 14/Pid.Sus-TPK/2017/PN.pdg with case Number 17/Pid.sus-TPK/2017/PN.pdg. Problem formulation (1) What factors cause disparity in court decisions in the form of criminal fines for corruption? (2) What obstacles did the judges encounter in minimizing the disparity in court decisions in the form of criminal fines in criminal acts of corruption? The research method used is sociological juridical research data collection techniques through interviews and document studies, the source of the data used primary and secondary. Data analyzed qualitatively. The results of the research show that: 1) Factors that cause disparity in court decisions depend on the agreement of the panel of judges, what is the value of the loss of state money, there is justice for the state and there is justice for the defendant. 2) The judge did not find any obstacles in deciding the result of a criminal case because the judge had agreed and agreed with the other judges in accordance with Law Number 31 of 1999 as amended by Law Number 20 of 2001 concerning Eradicating Corruption .                                                                 Â
Keywords : Disparity, Decision, Court, Corruption
References
Daftar Pustaka
A. BUKU-BUKU
Adami Chazawi, 2007, Pelajaran Hukum Pidana Bagian Ed. I, Cet. 3, Jakarta, PT Raja Grafindo Persada.
Andi Hamzah, 2001, Bunga Rampai Hukum Pidana dan Acara Pidana, Ghalia Indonesia Jakarta.
Bambang Sunggono, 1996, Metode Penelitian Hukum, PT Raja Grafindo Persada, Jakarta.
Barda Nawawi Arief, 2002, Bunga Rampai Kebijakan Hukum Pidana, Bandung, Citra Aditya Bati.
Black Henry Cambell, 1979, Black’s Law Dictionary, St. Paul. Minn, West Publishing Co.
Eni Hartati, 2005, Tindak Pidana Korupsi, Sinar Grafika, Jakarta.
H. Eddy Djunaidi Karnasudirdja, 1983, Beberapa Pedoman Pemidanaan dan Pengamatan Narapidana, Pradya Pramita, Jakarta
Hermien Hadiati Koeswadji, 1995, Perkembangan Macam-Macam Pidana Dalam Rangka Pembangunan Hukum Pidana, Cet. I, Bandung, Citra Aditya Bakti.
Muladi, 1995, Kapita Selekta Sistem Peradilan Pidana, Badan Penerbit UNDIP, Semarang.
Muladi, dan Barda Nawawi Arief, 2005, Teori-teori dan Kebijakan Pidana, Alumni, Bandung.
-------------------------------------------, 1982, Pidana dan Pemidanaan, Semarang, FH Unissula Semarang.
Nadiatus Salama, 2010, Fenomena Korupsi Indonesia (Kajian Mengenai Motif dan Proses Terjadinya Korupsi), Pusat Penelitian IAIN Walisongo Semarang.
Roeslan Saleh, 1978, Suatu Reorientasi dalam Hukum Pidana, Cet. 2, Jakarta, Aksara Baru.
Suryono Sutarto, 2003. Hukum Acara Pidana Jilid I, Cet. III, Badan Penerbit Universitas Diponegoro, Semarang
Yulies Tiena Masriani, 2004, Pengantar Hukum Indonesia, Cet.I, Jakarta, Sinar Grafika
B. PERATURAN PERUNDANG-UNDANGAN
Undang-Undang Dasar 1945 Pasal 24 ayat (1)
Undang-Undang Nomor 8 Tahun 1981 tentang Hukum Acara Pidana
Undang-Undang Nomor 20 Tahun 2001 Tentang Perubahan atas Undang-Undang Nomor 31 Tahun 1999 Tentang Pemberantasan Tindak Pidana Korupsi
C. SUMBER LAIN
Nimerodi Gulo, Ade Kurniawan M., 2018, Disparitas Dalam Penjatuhan Pidana file:///C:/ Users/ Farhan%20 Furqani/ Downloads/ Documents/17096-54780-1-PB.pdf.
