Home
Login.
Artikelilmiahs
36204
Update
SHEVA SYAHDARAHMITHA
NIM
Judul Artikel
JURIDICAL REVIEW OF DISSENTING OPINION ON THE VERDICT OF CRIMINAL ACT OF PERSECUTION (Case Study of Verdict Number 678/Pid.B/2020/PN Smr)
Abstrak (Bhs. Indonesia)
The existence of the principle of freedom for judges in making decisions causes a Dissenting Opinion. The object of this research is The Verdict Number 678/Pid.B/2020/PN Bms. The purpose of this study is to determine the basis for the consideration of minority and majority judges so that it causes a difference of opinion or Dissenting Opinion . The research method in this case is normative juridical with a statutory approach and an analytical approach. The research results of this study indicate that judges in the implementation of Dissenting Opinion in Case Number 678/Pid.B/2020/PN Bms have been by Law Number 48 of 2009 concerning Judicial Powers that during confidential judges' deliberation meetings, each The judge has given his opinion. These considerations have also been included in the decision. The opinion of the majority of judges are that the Defendant has fulfilled all the elements in Article 351 paragraph (1) of the Criminal Code which consists of elements whoever, purposely, causes discomfort, pain or injury. Minority Judges conduct a Dissenting Opinion with the view that one of the elements, namely the element of purposely in Article 351 paragraph (1) of the Criminal Code is not fulfilled.
Abtrak (Bhs. Inggris)
The existence of the principle of freedom for judges in making decisions causes a Dissenting Opinion. The object of this research is The Verdict Number 678/Pid.B/2020/PN Bms. The purpose of this study is to determine the basis for the consideration of minority and majority judges so that it causes a difference of opinion or Dissenting Opinion . The research method in this case is normative juridical with a statutory approach and an analytical approach. The research results of this study indicate that judges in the implementation of Dissenting Opinion in Case Number 678/Pid.B/2020/PN Bms have been by Law Number 48 of 2009 concerning Judicial Powers that during confidential judges' deliberation meetings, each The judge has given his opinion. These considerations have also been included in the decision. The opinion of the majority of judges are that the Defendant has fulfilled all the elements in Article 351 paragraph (1) of the Criminal Code which consists of elements whoever, purposely, causes discomfort, pain or injury. Minority Judges conduct a Dissenting Opinion with the view that one of the elements, namely the element of purposely in Article 351 paragraph (1) of the Criminal Code is not fulfilled.
Kata kunci
Pembimbing 1
Pembimbing 2
Pembimbing 3
Tahun
Jumlah Halaman
Save