Penggunaan Laporan Penelitian Kemasyarakatan Dalam Sistem Peradilan Pidana Anak Oleh Hakim

Sayid Andi Maulana, Dahlan Ali, Muhammad Saleh

Abstract


Undang-Undang No. 11 Tahun 2012 tentang Sistem Peradilan Pidana Anak, Pasal 60 ayat (3) “Hakim wajib mempertimbangkan laporan penelitian kemasyarakatan dari Pembimbing Kemasyarakatan sebelum menjatuhkan putusan perkara”, ayat (4) “Dalam hal laporan penelitian kemasyarakatan sebagaimana dimaksud pada ayat (3) tidak dipertimbangkan dalam putusan Hakim, putusan batal demi hukum”. Namun hingga saat ini masih ditemukan putusan pengadilan yang sama sekali tidak mempertimbangkan laporan penelitian kemasyarakatan. Permasalahan yang perlu dikaji apakah sebab Hakim tidakmempertimbangkanLaporanPenelitianKemasyarakatan, dan bagaimanakah konsekuensihukumjikatidakdilaksanakannyaLaporanPenelitianKemasyarakatan.Tujuanpenulisanini untukmengetahuisebab Hakim tidakmempertimbangkanLaporanPenelitianKemasyarakatan dan untuk mengetahuikonsekuensihukumjikatidakdilaksanakannyaLaporanPenelitianKemasyarakatan. Metode penelitian yang digunakan yaitu yuridis empiris. Berdasarkan hasil penelitian diketahui bahwadalammemutuskanperkaraanak yang berhadapandenganhukum,Hakim memilikialasanterhadaptidakmenguraikanlaporanpenelitiankemasyarakatanpadaputusan karena Hakim padaprinsipnyasudahmempertimbangkanlaporanpenelitiankemasyarakatan. Konsekuensihukumjika Hakim tidakmempertimbangkanLitmas yaitu anak masih tetap bisa ditahanuntuk proses peradilan yaitu perbaikan Putusan. Disarankan agar Hakim dapat mengulasisi materi dari Litmas dalam putusannya, termasukrekomendasi yang diberikanolehBapas.DisarankankepadaKementerianHukumdan HAM supayamemperhatikanketersediaantenagafungsionalBapassertapeningkatankompetensi agar menghasilkanLitmas yang semakinbaik sehingga jauh dari persepsi “copy paste”


Law Number 11 Year 2012 on the Criminal Justice System of the Child, in Article 60 paragraph (3) "The judge is obliged to consider the reports of the research community from the community Supervisor before dropping the lawsuit verdict "paragraph (4) In terms of Community research reports as referred to in paragraph (3) are not considered in the judge's verdict, the verdict is annulled by law ". However up to now still found the Court ruling that simply does not consider research report. Problems that need to be examined whether because the judge did not consider Viable research report, and how do the legal consequences if it does not tackle in the research report. The purpose of this writing is to know because the judge did not consider the report of the Research Community and to know the legal consequences if it does not tackle in the research report. The research method used i.e. empirical juridical. Based on the results of the research it is known that in deciding a child dealing with matters of law, The judge has a reason against civic research report outlines not at ruling because Judges in principle had already been considering a research report. The legal consequences if the judge does not consider Litmas i.e. children still could be detained for judicial process, namely the improvement award. It is recommended that Judges can mengulasisi material from Litmas in an award, including the recommendations given by Bapas. It is recommended to the Ministry of Justice and human rights in order that notice of the availability of functional competency enhancement as well as Bapas in order to produce better Litmas so far from the perception of "copy paste".


Keywords


Laporan Penelitian Kemasyarakatan; Alasan Hakim; Konsekuensi Hukum; Community Research Report; Reason of Judge; Legal Consequences

Full Text:

PDF

References


Barbara Henkes, The Role of Education in Juvenile Justice in Eastern Europe and The Farmer Soviet Union, Constitutional & Legal Policy Institute, Hungary, 2000. Dalam Yayasan Pemantau Hak Anak, Anak yang Berhadapan dengan Hukum dalam Perspektif Hukum Hak Asasi Manusia Internasional, Internet, hlm. 2. diakses pada 19 September 2017.

Fachmi, Kepastian Hukum Mengenai Putusan Batal Demi Hukum dalam Sistem Peradilan Pidana Indonesia, Ghalia Indonesia publishing, Bogor, 2011, hlm.163

Leden Marpaung, Proses Penanganan Perkara Pidana: Di Kejaksaan Dan Pengadilan Negeri Upaya Hukum Dan Eksekusi, Sinar Grafika, Jakarta, 2010.

Lutfi CHakim, Sistem Peradilan Anak, www.lutficHakim.com, diakses pada Rabu 24 Januari 2018.

Nandang Sambas, Peradilan Pidana Anak di Indonesia dan Instrumen Internasional Perlindungan Anak serta Penerapannya, Graha Ilmu, Yogyakarta, 2013.

Yusri lIhza Mahendra, Pendapat Hukum Terhadap Putusan Batal Demi Hukum, http://yusril.ihzamahendra.com/2012/05/17/pendapat-hukum-terhadap-putusan-batal-demi-hukum/, diakses1 Februari 2018.

Undang-Undang Nomor 11 Tahun 2012 tentang Sistem Peradilan Pidana Anak.




DOI: https://doi.org/10.24815/sklj.v2i2.11635

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


Copyright (c) 2018 Syiah Kuala Law Journal (SKLJ)

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Magister Ilmu Hukum
Faculty of Law, Syiah Kuala University
Putroe Phang Street No.1. Darussalam, Provinsi Aceh, 23111
Telp: (0651) 7410147, 7551781. Fax: 7551781
e-mail: sklj@unsyiah.ac.id

ISSN : 2580-9059 (online) 2549-1741 (cetak)


Creative Commons License

Syiah Kuala Law Journal by Magister Ilmu Hukum Fakultas Hukum Universitas Syiah Kuala is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Based on a work at http://jurnal.unsyiah.ac.id/SKLJ.