Analisis Hukum Terhadap Diskrepansi Peradilan Dalam Tindak Pidana Pengalihan Jaminan Fidusia

Studi Putusan Nomor 45/Pid.Sus/2023/PN.SMN

Authors

  • Alex Sukadi Universitas Proklamasi 45 Yogyakarta
  • Antonius Maria Laot Kian Universitas Proklamasi 45 Yogyakarta
  • Cecep Tedi Siswanto Universitas Proklamasi 45 Yogyakarta

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.62383/prosemnashuk.v2i2.62

Keywords:

Court discrepancy, Criminal verdict, Fiducia, Legal certainty, Protection of the defendant's rights

Abstract

This research examines judicial discrepancies in criminal cases of fiduciary transfer, focusing on Decision No. 45/Pid.Sus/2023/PN.SMN. Discrepancy is understood as the inconsistency between trial facts, the prosecutor’s evidence, and the judge’s considerations, which may lead to injustice and reduce public trust in the judiciary. The purpose of this study is to analyze the forms of discrepancy found in the decision and to assess their legal implications for the protection of the defendant’s rights and legal certainty. The research method employed is empirical juridical research with a sociological juridical approach, using statutory analysis, case studies, interviews with law enforcers, and literature review. The findings indicate disharmony in the assessment of intent (mens rea), the interpretation of written consent, and the proof of losses suffered by fiduciary recipients. Such discrepancies weaken the quality of the judgment, create legal uncertainty, and potentially violate the principle of fair trial. This study concludes that harmonization between trial facts, prosecutorial evidence, and judicial reasoning is necessary to maintain the integrity of the criminal justice system, improve the quality of judicial decisions, and strengthen legal protection for the parties involved.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Artikel Jurnal

Nurkholis, & Arika, R. E. (2017). Kesesuaian pertimbangan hakim dalam putusan pemidanaan. Jurnal Hukum, 17(2).

Buku Teks

Beauchamp, T. L., & Walters, L. (2012). Contemporary issues in bioethics (8th ed.). Boston, MA: Wadsworth.

Bambang, B. D. (2008). Hukum acara pidana: Teori dan praktik. Jakarta: Kencana.

Dewi, S. D. R., & Monita, Y. (2021). Asas hukum pidana dalam perspektif pembaharuan hukum pidana. Jakarta: Rajawali Pers.

Fuady, M. (2000). Jaminan fidusia. Bandung: Citra Aditya Bakti.

Harahap, M. Y. (2012). Pembahasan permasalahan dan penerapan KUHAP: Pemeriksaan sidang pengadilan, banding, kasasi, dan peninjauan kembali. Jakarta: Sinar Grafika.

Harahap, M. Y. (2016). Pembahasan permasalahan dan penerapan KUHAP: Pemeriksaan sidang pengadilan, banding, kasasi, dan peninjauan kembali. Jakarta: Sinar Grafika.

Hiariej, E. O. S. (2012). Teori & hukum pembuktian. Jakarta: Erlangga.

Muhammad, R. (2018). Hukum pidana ekonomi. Jakarta: Prenadamedia Group.

Muladi. (1995). Kapita selekta sistem peradilan pidana. Semarang: Badan Penerbit Universitas Diponegoro.

Mulyadi, L. (2007). Hukum acara pidana: Normatif, teoretis, praktik dan permasalahannya. Bandung: Alumni.

Mulyadi, L. (2010). Hukum acara pidana: Normatif, teoretis, praktik dan permasalahannya. Bandung: Alumni.

Mulya, K., & Cholidi. (2022). Hukum acara pidana: Teori, praktik, dan implementasi. Bandung: Mandar Maju.

Noer, P. A. (2020). Hukum acara pidana: Perspektif Mahkamah Konstitusi. Bandung: Refika Aditama.

Noer, R. A. (2020). Analisis hukum acara pidana di Indonesia. Jakarta: Prenada Media.

Rahardjo, S. (2000). Ilmu hukum. Bandung: Citra Aditya Bakti.

Rawls, J. (1971). A theory of justice. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Rawls, J. (1977). A theory of justice. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Rawls, J. (1993). Political liberalism. New York, NY: Columbia University Press.

Rawls, J. (1999). A theory of justice (Rev. ed.). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Rawls, J. (2001). Justice as fairness: A restatement. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Reksodiputro, M. (1994). Sistem peradilan pidana Indonesia: Melihat kejahatan dan penegakan hukum dalam batas-batas toleransi. Jakarta: Pusat Pelayanan Keadilan dan Pengabdian Hukum Universitas Indonesia.

Sahetapy, J. E. (1992). Teori kriminologi: Suatu pengantar. Bandung: Citra Aditya Bakti.

Waluyo, B. (2008). Pidana dan pemidanaan. Jakarta: Sinar Grafika.

Wiriadinata, W. (2016). Sistem pembuktian dalam hukum acara pidana. Jakarta: Kencana.

Perundang-undangan

Republik Indonesia. (1945). Undang-Undang Dasar Negara Republik Indonesia Tahun 1945, Pasal 28D ayat (1).

Republik Indonesia. (1981). Undang-Undang Nomor 8 Tahun 1981 tentang Hukum Acara Pidana (LN No. 76 Tahun 1981, TLN No. 3209).

Republik Indonesia. (1999). Undang-Undang Nomor 42 Tahun 1999 tentang Jaminan Fidusia (LN No. 168 Tahun 1999, TLN No. 3889).

Putusan Pengadilan

Pengadilan Negeri Sleman. (2023). Putusan Nomor 45/Pid.Sus/2023/PN.SMN.

Downloads

Published

2025-09-30