ANALISIS PUTUSAN NOMOR 28/PID.SUSANAK/2020/PN .Mre

Abstract

Decision Number 28/Pid.Sus-Anak/2020/PN.Mre is a decision on a narcotics crime involving a minor. The defendant ABR was sentenced to two years and six months in prison. This decision contains inconsistency. The judge should look at the subject and object of the law when imposing punishment. In this case, the judge only considered the legal object, narcotics, while the legal subject, the minor, was ignored. This research has two objectives. First, to understand and analyze the cause of inconsistency in the judge’s decision on this case. Second, to understand and analyze the ideal concept judges should give to minors involved in narcotics crime. This study uses a normative legal method that examines the application of positive legal principles or norms. The data comes from secondary sources, namely books, articles, research, and experts’ opinions. The study displays that the decision contradicts Article 114 of the Law on
Narcotics, Article 67 of the Law on Child Protection, and Article 3 letter g of the Law on the Juvenile Criminal Justice System. The judge should decide this case following the Law on Child Protection and the Juvenile Criminal Justice System. Article 67 of the Law on Child Protection mentions that special protection for children who are victims of abuse of narcotics, alcohol, psychotropics, and other addictive substances and children who are involved in production and distribution is carried out through monitoring, prevention, and rehabilitation. Meanwhile, Article 3 letter g of the Juvenile Criminal Justice System states that apprehension, detention, or imprisonment is executed as a last resort.