Raides Kota, Suheflihusnaini Ashady

Perlindungan Hukum Terhadap Terpidana Yang Menjalani Pidana Melebihi Amar Putusan Pengadilan (Studi Putusan Mahkamah Agung Nomor 162 K/Pid/2024)

Introduction

Perlindungan hukum terhadap terpidana yang menjalani pidana melebihi amar putusan pengadilan (studi putusan mahkamah agung nomor 162 k/pid/2024). Kaji perlindungan hukum bagi terpidana yang menjalani pidana melebihi amar putusan pengadilan. Temukan jaminan HAM, ganti rugi (Pasal 95 KUHAP), & pelaporan Hakim.

Abstract

Penelitian ini mengkaji tentang perlindungan hukum terhadap seseorang yang dipidana melebihi vonis penjara yang dijatuhkan oleh hakim di Pengadilan. Peneliti melakukan kajian terhadap lamanya vonis yang dijatuhkan dalam Putusan Pengadilan Negeri Waikabukak Nomor 76/Pid.B/2023/PN Wkb, Putusan Pengadilan Tinggi Kupang Nomor 153/PID/2023/PT KPG dan Putusan Mahkamah Agung Nomor 162 K/Pid/2024 terhadap seorang terdakwa dan diperbandingkan dengan lamanya waktu penahanan. Model penelitian yang digunakan adalah penelitian hukum normative dengan pendekatan kasus, pendekatan konseptual dan pendekatan perundang-undangan. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa konsep Hak Asasi Manusia telah dijamin dalam berbagai peraturan perundang-undangan pidana di Indonesia, termasuk dalam hal terjadinya pemidanaan tanpa dasar hukum yang sah, maka seseorang dapat mengajukan tuntutan ganti rugi dengan dasar pasal 95 KUHAP, dan dapat juga melakukan pelaporan ke Komisi Yudisial terkait dengan Hakim yang memeriksa perkara tersebut

Review

This paper, "Perlindungan Hukum Terhadap Terpidana Yang Menjalani Pidana Melebihi Amar Putusan Pengadilan (Studi Putusan Mahkamah Agung Nomor 162 K/Pid/2024)," addresses a critical issue within the Indonesian legal system: the legal protection for individuals who serve a sentence exceeding the court's verdict. The topic is of significant practical and theoretical importance, touching upon fundamental principles of human rights, due process, and judicial accountability. By employing a normative legal research methodology with case, conceptual, and legislative approaches, the study appropriately frames its inquiry within the existing legal framework while grounding it in specific judicial decisions. The focus on Putusan Mahkamah Agung Nomor 162 K/Pid/2024, alongside related decisions from the District Court and High Court, provides a concrete basis for examining these complex legal discrepancies. The research effectively highlights that the concept of human rights is well-enshrined in various Indonesian criminal laws, providing a foundation for recourse in cases of unlawful detention or excessive sentencing. A key strength lies in its identification of practical avenues for legal protection. The finding that individuals can claim compensation based on Article 95 of the Criminal Procedure Code (KUHAP) and lodge a complaint with the Judicial Commission against the examining judges offers clear, actionable insights for victims and legal practitioners alike. The comparative analysis between the awarded sentence and the actual period of detention, across the different judicial tiers, is particularly commendable for exposing the potential for procedural errors or negligence within the justice system. While the paper successfully identifies existing legal remedies, it could be further strengthened by exploring the systemic issues that lead to such over-detentions. Future research might delve into the causative factors behind these discrepancies—be it administrative oversight, lack of coordination between law enforcement and correctional facilities, or judicial error. Additionally, an analysis of the effectiveness and accessibility of the identified remedies (e.g., the success rate of compensation claims or Judicial Commission reports) would provide a more holistic understanding of the actual legal protection afforded. Nevertheless, this study makes a valuable contribution by clearly articulating the available legal mechanisms for addressing a grave violation of individual liberty, thereby serving as an important reference for maintaining judicial integrity and upholding human rights.

Full Text

Comments

You need to be logged in to post a comment.