HERMENEUTICS FOR JUDGES IN DECIDING CASES Number: 66/Pid.Sus/2021/Pn. Brb
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.48171/dejure.v6i3.181Keywords:
hermeneutics, judge, decision, caseAbstract
This research aims to legally analyze the basis for the judge's considerations regarding hermeneutics in deciding case number: 66/Pid.Sus/2021/Pn.Brb, and to theoretically analyze the legal force of the judge's decision based on the Criminal Procedure Code. This research utilizes the Theory of Justice by Laurence Baum, the Theory of Integrity and the Theory of Oversight by Stephen L. Carter and Stoner and Wankel, and the Theory of Proof by Yahya Harahap. The method used is normative and doctrinal legal, prescriptive in nature with the Statute approach, Conceptual approach, and Case approach, namely the decision of the panel of judges of the Barabai District Court regarding circumstantial evidence in Case Number 66/Pid.Sus/2021/Pn.Brb. The complex issues of illegal drug trafficking and drug-related crimes are due to three factors contributing to the increase in illegal drug circulation: weak interdiction capacity, leading to an increased risk of drug trafficking; increased drug abuse, resulting in higher demand for drugs; and a lack of cooperation between law enforcement agencies, both nationally and internationally.
Previous research by Samsudin, 2020, a thesis titled "The Code of Ethics and Guidelines for Judicial Conduct (A Comparative Study of the Book Adabu Al-Qadi and the Code of Ethics for Judges in Indonesia)," Master of Family Law Study Program, Faculty of Sharia and Law, Syarif Hidayatullah State Islamic University Jakarta. This empirical research focused on a comparative study of the code of ethics for judges in Indonesia with the book Adabu Al-Qadi from the element of Fiqh or Islamic Law, while the author's research specifically focuses on the legal aspects of Hermeneutics for judges in deciding cases by examining the outcomes of legal decisions regarding the cases.
The results of this study are based on Case Decision Number 66/Pid.Sus/2021/PN Brb, using a hermeneutic approach to interpret drug norms (the judge stated that the defendant's actions were considered to violate Article 114 paragraph (1) of Law No. 35 of 2009 concerning Narcotics, subsidiarily Article 112 paragraph (1) of Law of the Republic of Indonesia Number 35 of 2009 concerning Narcotics). Awareness of social complexity, limitations of legal texts, and the plurality of interpretations encourages critical interpretation. The legal force of the decision, within the framework of the Criminal Procedure Code, lies in the combination of rational interpretation with evidence assessment (including circumstantial evidence), allowing the decision to have strong judicial conviction and comprehensive justification
References
Buku
Akbar, Patrialis, 2013. Hubungan Lembaga Kepresidenan dengan Dewan Perwakilan Rakyat dan Veto Presiden, Total Media, Yogyakarta.
Asshiddiqie, Jimly, 2010. Konstitusi & Konstitusionalisme Indonesia, Sinar Grafika, Jakarta.
Bagijo, Himawan Estu, 2014, Negara Hukum & Mahkamah Konstitusi, Laksbang Grafika, Yogyakarta.
Harahap, Yahya, 2008, Kekuasaan Mahkamah Agung Pemeriksaan Kasasidan Peninjauan Kembali Perkara Perdata, Sinar Grafika, Jakarta.
Marifah, Monika PA, Neni Susilawati, dkk.., (2025), Metodologi Penelitian Sosial Kontemporer, CV. Bumi Utama Mandiri, Yogyakarta : Deepublish.
Samsudin, (2020), tesis, Kode Etik Dan Pedoman Perilaku Hakim (Studi Komparatif Kitab Adabu Al-Qadi Dengan Kode Etik Hakim Di Indonesia), Program Studi Magister Hukum Keluarga Fakultas Syariah Dan Hukum Universitas Islam Negeri Syarif Hidayatullah Jakarta.
Sodiqin, A. (2015). Restorative Justice dalam Tindak Pidana Pembunuhan: Perspektif Hukum Pidana Indonesia dan Hukum Pidana Islam. Asy-Syir'ah: Jurnal Ilmu Syari'ah dan Hukum, 49(1), 64. doi: 10.30656/ajudikasi.v2i1.575.
Sosiawan, U. M. (2017). Perspektif Restorative Justice Sebagai Wujud Perlindungan Anak Yang Berhadapan Dengan Hukum (Perspective of Restorative Justice as a Children Protection Against the Law). Jurnal Penelitian Hukum De Jure, 16(4), 426. doi: 10.30641/dejure.2016.
Sukardi, S. (2016). Eksistensi Konsep Restorative Justice Dalam Sistem Hukum Pidana di Indonesia. Legal Pluralism: Journal of Law Science, 6(1).
Sudiarawan, K. A., Tanaya, P. E., & Hermanto, B. (2020). Discover the Legal Concept in the Sociological Study. Substantive Justice International Journal of Law, 3(1), 94- 108.
Sunaryo, S., & Purnamawati, S. A. (2019). Paradigma Hukum Yang Benar dan Hukum yang Baik (Perspektif Desain Putusan Hakim Perkara Korupsi di Indonesia). Hukum Pidana dan Pembangunan Hukum, 1(2).
Syamsudin, M. (2012), Konstruksi Baru Budaya Hukum Hakim, Jakarta: Kencana Prenada Media Grup.
Yulia, R. (2012). Penerapan Keadilan Restoratif Dalam Putusan Hakim: Upaya Penyelesaian Konflik Melalui Sistem Peradilan Pidana. Jurnal Yudisial, 5(2), 226. doi: 10.29123/jy.v5i2.155.
Internet /World Wide Web:
Komisi Yudisial Republik Indonesia. KY Tekankan Hakim Harus Berintegritas dan Adil.
Peraturan Perundang-Undangan
Undang Undang Dasar 1945
Kitab Undang-Undang Hukum Pidana (KUHP).
Undang-Undang No 24 Tahun 2003 Tentang Mahkamah Konstitusi
Undang-Undang No 22 Tahun 2004 Tentang Komisi Yudisial
Undang-Undang No 48 Tahun 2009 Tentang Kekuasaan Kehakiman
Undang-Undang No 49 Tahun 2009 Tentang Peradilan Umum
SKB MA dan KY tahun 2009 Tentang Kode Etik dan Pedoman Perilaku Hakim
Undang-Undang Republik Indonesia Nomor 8 Tahun 1981 Tentang Hukum Acara Pidana (Lembaran Negara Republik Indonesia Tahun 1982 Nomor 76; Tambahan Lembaran Negara Republik Indonesia Nomor 3209).
Undang-Undang Republik Indonesia Nomor 11 tahun 2012 tentang Sistem Peradilan Anak (Lembaran Negara Republik Indonesia Tahun 2012 Nomor 153; Tambahan Lembaran Negara Republik Indonesia Nomor 5332).
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Mahyuni Mahyuni
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
