Penerapan Pasal 49 Ayat 1 Kuhp Dalam Tindak Pidana Penganiayaan (Studi Putusan No.32/Pid.B/2021/PN DGL)
), Reimon Supusepa(2), Judy Marria Saimima(3)
(1) Fakultas Hukum Universitas Pattimura, Ambon, Indonesia
(2) Fakultas Hukum Universitas Pattimura, Ambon, Indonesia
(3) Fakultas Hukum Universitas Pattimura, Ambon, Indonesia
Corresponding Author
Abstract
Introduction: Perpetrators of persecution should be subject to punishment as stipulated in the criminal law code, Article 351 Paragraph 1 of the Criminal Code. The defendant abused the victim, the torture was carried out in a forced defense because he felt his safety was threatened.
Purposes of the Research: So it raises the problem of how to apply noodweer in Article 49 Paragraph 1 of the Criminal Code as a reason for abolishing the crime? What are the juridical consequences in the judge's consideration of the forced defense of the crime of persecution.The purpose of the study is to find out the application of noodweer in Article 49 Paragraph 1 of the Criminal Code as the reason for the abolition of the crime. To find out the juridical consequences in the judge's consideration of the forced defense of the criminal act of persecution
Methods of the Research: The problem approach used is the conceptual approach, statutory approach and case approach. The legal materials used are primary legal materials and secondary legal materials. Collection of legal materials using literature and then analyzed using quantitative analysis methods.
Results of the Research: Based on the results of the research and discussion that the application of noodweer when viewed from the cases taken by the author has been implemented properly and is used as one of the reasons for abolishing a crime, where the reason is a justification but not a reason that justifies the actions of the perpetrator who violated the law, but rather someone is forced to commit an act punishment can be forgiven because there was a violation of law that preceded the act. However, not all actions that are considered as self-defense can be accepted by criminal law as a reason for criminal abolition. Because an act in the noodweer context must comply with the elements specified in Article 49 Paragraph 1 of the Criminal Code. The defense outside the elements specified in Article 49 Paragraph 1 of the Criminal Code is still possible for the offender to be subject to a criminal sentence. That there are no legal consequences for the perpetrators who are considered to have fulfilled the elements in Article 49 Paragraph 1 of the Criminal Code which says: "not convicted, whoever makes a defense is forced to himself or others, the honor of decency or property of himself or others, because any imminent attack or threat of attack at that time would be against the law.” If an act does not meet the elements in that article, then the perpetrator can be criminalized because it is not included in forced defense.
Keywords
DOI
10.47268/tatohi.v3i7.1854
Published
2023-10-23
How To Cite
@article{TATOHI1854,
author = {Faathir Fedayan and Reimon Supusepa and Judy Saimima},
title = {Penerapan Pasal 49 Ayat 1 Kuhp Dalam Tindak Pidana Penganiayaan (Studi Putusan No.32/Pid.B/2021/PN DGL)},
journal = {TATOHI: Jurnal Ilmu Hukum},
volume = {3},
number = {7},
year = {2023},
keywords = {Application; Crime; Persecution},
abstract = {Introduction: Perpetrators of persecution should be subject to punishment as stipulated in the criminal law code, Article 351 Paragraph 1 of the Criminal Code. The defendant abused the victim, the torture was carried out in a forced defense because he felt his safety was threatened.Purposes of the Research: So it raises the problem of how to apply noodweer in Article 49 Paragraph 1 of the Criminal Code as a reason for abolishing the crime? What are the juridical consequences in the judge's consideration of the forced defense of the crime of persecution.The purpose of the study is to find out the application of noodweer in Article 49 Paragraph 1 of the Criminal Code as the reason for the abolition of the crime. To find out the juridical consequences in the judge's consideration of the forced defense of the criminal act of persecutionMethods of the Research: The problem approach used is the conceptual approach, statutory approach and case approach. The legal materials used are primary legal materials and secondary legal materials. Collection of legal materials using literature and then analyzed using quantitative analysis methods.Results of the Research: Based on the results of the research and discussion that the application of noodweer when viewed from the cases taken by the author has been implemented properly and is used as one of the reasons for abolishing a crime, where the reason is a justification but not a reason that justifies the actions of the perpetrator who violated the law, but rather someone is forced to commit an act punishment can be forgiven because there was a violation of law that preceded the act. However, not all actions that are considered as self-defense can be accepted by criminal law as a reason for criminal abolition. Because an act in the noodweer context must comply with the elements specified in Article 49 Paragraph 1 of the Criminal Code. The defense outside the elements specified in Article 49 Paragraph 1 of the Criminal Code is still possible for the offender to be subject to a criminal sentence. That there are no legal consequences for the perpetrators who are considered to have fulfilled the elements in Article 49 Paragraph 1 of the Criminal Code which says: "not convicted, whoever makes a defense is forced to himself or others, the honor of decency or property of himself or others, because any imminent attack or threat of attack at that time would be against the law.” If an act does not meet the elements in that article, then the perpetrator can be criminalized because it is not included in forced defense.},
issn = {2775-619X}, pages = {702--720} doi = {10.47268/tatohi.v3i7.1854},
url = {https://fhukum.unpatti.ac.id/jurnal/tatohi/article/view/1854}
}
Jurnal
Dewa Agung Ari Aprillya Devita Cahyani, Anak Agung Sagung Laksmi Dewi, I Made Minggu Widyantara, Analisis Pembuktian Alasan Pembelaan Terpaksa Yang Melampaui Batas Dalam Tindak Pidana Yang Menyebabkan Kematian, Jurnal Analogi Hukum Vol. 1 No. 2, 2019.
Sherly Adam, Reimon Supusepa, Jacob Hattu, Iqbal Taufik, Penegakan Hukum Terhadap Pelanggaran Protokol Kesehatan yang Dilakukan Masyarakat Pada Masa Pandemi Covid-19 di Kota Ambon, Jurnal Sasi Vol. 27 No. 2, 2021.
Buku
Adami Chazawi, Pelajaran Hukum Pidana II, Rajawali Press, Jakarta, 2002
Andi Hamzah, Hukum Acara Pidana Indonesia, Sinar Grafik, Jakarta, 2008
Barda Nawawi Arief, Kebijakan Legislatif dalam Penanggulangan kejahatan dengan Hukum Pidana, Ananta, Semarang, 1994
Chainur Arrasjid, Pengantar Psikologi Kriminal, Yani Corporation, Medan, 2007
Ismu Gunadi dan Jonaedi Efendi, Cepat dan Mudah Memahami Hukum Pidana, Cetakan Pertama. Kencana, Jakarta, 2014
Kartini Kartono, Patologi sosial, Jilid I, Rajawali Press, Jakarta, 1992
Mahrus Ali, Dasar Hukum Pidana, Cetakan Pertama, Sinar Grafik, Jakarta, 2011
M. Yahya Harapan, Pembahasan Permasalahan Dan Penerapan KUHAP: Pemerikasaan Sidang Pengadilan, Banding, Kasasi, dan Peninjauan Kembali, Sinar Grafik, Jakarta, 2012
P.A.F Lamintang, Dasar-Dasar Hukum Pidana Di Indonesia, Cetakan I, Sinar Grafik, Jakarta, 2014
Soerjono Soekanto, Penelitian Hukum Normatif, Suatu Tinjauan Singkat, Rajawali Press, Jakarta, 1998
Sudarsono, Kamus Hukum Cetakan kelima, Rineka Cipta, Jakarta, 2007
Tirtaamidjaja, Pokok-Pokok Hukum Pidana, Fasco, Jakarta, 1955
Zainal Abidin Farid, Hukum Pidana 1, Sinar Grafik, Jakarta, 2010
Zuleha, Dasar-Dasar Hukum Pidana, Deepublish, Yogyakarta, 2017
: 385 times
Download : 121 times
Refbacks
- There are currently no refbacks.
Copyright (c) 2023 Faathir Fedayan, Reimon Supusepa, Judy Marria Saimima
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
