¹Rini Fathonah,²Daffa Ladro Kusworo,³Maghfira Nur Khaliza Fauzi

^1,2,3Law of Faculty Lampung University, Indonesia

DOI : https://doi.org/10.47191/ijsshr/v6-i2-48

Google Scholar Download Pdf
ABSTRACT

The verdict is still rarely known by the people of Indonesia. The question in society is why judges do not add punishment to perpetrators of criminal acts who have been proven valid and guilty of committing crimes. The implementation of zero sentences is still a problem in law enforcement in Indonesia. The reason is because, a zero sentence is not included in the type of punishment mentioned in Article 10 of the Criminal Code. The research method used is normative juridical which is carried out by studying, viewing and examining legal regulations such as the Criminal Code and Circular Letter Number 1 of 2022 concerning the Enforcement of the Formulation of the Results of the 2022 Supreme Court Chamber Plenary Meeting. The results of the study show that the application of the Zero Sentence in Indonesia certainly creates problems, namely two different opinions, if the defendant has been sentenced to a maximum prison sentence of 20 years, so if there are other cases a Zero Verdict is required, especially since there is SEMA No. 1 of 2022.

KEYWORDS:

Concursus, Principle, Zero verdict

REFERENCES

1) Arief, B. N. (2016). Bunga Rampai Kebijakan Hukum Pidana. Prenada Media.

2) Asmarawati, T. (2015). Pidana dan Pemidanaan dalam Sistem Hukum di Indonesia (Hukum Penitensier). Deepublish.

3) Barda Nawawi Arief. (2010). Masalah Penegakan Hukum dan Kebijakan Hukum Pidana dalam Penanggulangan Kejahatan. Kencana.

4) Bawangun, A. (2014). Pertanggungjawaban Kode Etik Hakim dalam Memutuskan Perkara Pidana. Lex Crimen, 3(2)., 76-90

5) Candra, S. (2013). Pembaharuan Hukum Pidana; Konsep Pertanggungjawaban Pidana Dalam Hukum Pidana Nasional Yang Akan Datang. Jurnal Cita Hukum, 1(1).

6) Darmika, (2016). Budaya Hukum ( Legal Culture ) Dan Pengaruhnya. Jurnal Hukum Tô-Râ, Vol. 2 No., 429–435.

7) Fadlian, A. (2020). Pertanggungjawaban Pidana dalam Suatu Kerangka Teoritis. Jurnal Hukum Positum, 5(2).

8) Fajrin, Y. A., & Triwijaya, A. F. (2019). Arah Pembaharuan Hukum Pidana Indonesia di Tengah Pluralisme Hukum Indonesia. Ekspose: Jurnal Penelitian Hukum Dan Pendidikan, 18(1), 734–740.

9) Hasibuan, S. A. (2019). Kebijakan Pertanggungjawaban Pidana Dalam Rangka Perlindungan Hukum Bagi Anak. Jurnal Hukum Responsif, 7(7), 169–175.

10) Helnawaty, H. (2017). Hukum Pidana Adat Dalam Pembaharuan Hukum Pidana Nasional. Binamulia Hukum, 6(2), 149– 160.

11) Kitab Undang-Undang Hukum Pidana.

12) Suhartono, S. (2020). Hukum Positif Problematik Penerapan Dan Solusi Teoritiknya. DiH: Jurnal Ilmu Hukum, 15(2).

13) Usman. (2014). Analisis Perkembangan Teori Hukum Pidana. Jurnal Ilmu Hukum, 1–8.

14) Zaidan, M. A. (2022). Menuju Pembaruan Hukum Pidana. Sinar Grafika.

VOlUME 06 ISSUE 02 FEBRUARY 2023