Ada dua tujuan yang diharapkan dari penelitian ini yaitu: 1. Untuk mengetahui penerapan hukum di pengadilan terhadap anak yang melakukan tindak pidana. 2. Untuk mengetahui penyebab terjadinya disparitas putusan pengadilan dalam memutuskan kasus tindak pidana anak. Penelitian ini menggunakan jenis penelitian Normatif dan Empiris dengan pendekatan sosiologi hukum dan menggunakan studi komparasi putusan pengadilan Negeri. Sumber data yang digunakan yaitu putusan pengadilan negeri, Putusan Nomor: 41/Pid.Sus-Anak/2019/PN. Padang, Putusan Nomor: 1/Pid.Sus-Anak/2020/PN Tarutung, Putusan Nomor: 1/Pid.Sus-Anak/2019/ PN Masohi. Metode pengumpulan data dalam penelitian ini adalah melalui peraturan Perundang-undangan, buku-buku, artikel, laporan penelitian, dan jurnal hukum yang berkaitan dengan judul skripsi ini. Teknik pengolahan dan analisis bahan hukum yang digunkan ialah analisis data komparatif yakni membandingkan tiga putusan pengadilan tentang pertanggungjawaban anak terhadap tindak pidana yang dilakukan.Hasil penelitian yang diperoleh dalam tulisan ini yaitu: 1. Penerapan Hukum di Pengadilan terhadap anak yang melakukan tindak pidana terdiri dari pidana pokok dan pidana tambahan. 2. Terjadinya Disparitas Putusan pengadilan selain karena adanya ketentuan dalam Undang-Undang Kekuasaan Kehakiman yang memberi kebebasan bagi hakim dalam menjatuhkan sanksi pidana terhadap pelaku yang telah ditentukan oleh Undang-Undang, juga dilatarbelakangi oleh pertimbangan hakim terhadap fakta-fakta yang ditemukan dalam persidangan.Kata Kunci : Tanggung Jawab Hukum, Anak, Tindak Pidana
This research aims to investigate access to justice for children and women in the Religious Court Decisions after the issuance of Circular Letter of Supreme Court No. 4 of 2016, Point 5 on Religious Chamber. This particular point states that the Religious Court can require a father to provide child maintenance if the child is under the custody of the mother. This is a normative study, with the data obtained from interviews and 150 Religious court decisions. These decisions are issued by the Religious Courts of East Jakarta and Central Jakarta from 2015-2017. The examination of those Decisions reveals that most of the decisions on divorce do not mention any stipulation about child maintenance. This means that the Supreme Court Circular No. 4 of 2016 has not been able to protect children rights in the case of divorce, as well as women’s rights. From the court used in this study, only 14% that require the fathers to provide child maintenance after divorce. This percentage is almost similar to the decisions issued before the issuance of the Circular, which only 12% in 2016, and 14% in 2017. AbstrakPenelitian ini bertujuan untuk mengetahui akses keadilan bagi anak dan perempuan dalam Putusan Pengadilan Agama pasca terbitnya Keputusan Mahkamah Agung Nomor 4 Tahun 2016 Poin 5 tentang Kamar Beragama. Dalam poin khusus ini disebutkan bahwa Pengadilan Agama dapat meminta seorang ayah untuk mengasuh anak jika anak tersebut berada di bawah asuhan ibunya. Penelitian ini bersifat normatif, dengan data diperoleh dari wawancara dan 150 putusan Pengadilan Agama. Putusan-putusan tersebut dikeluarkan oleh Pengadilan Agama Jakarta Timur dan Jakarta Pusat dari tahun 2015- 2017. Berdasarkan pemeriksaan terhadap Putusan tersebut, sebagian besar Putusan perceraian tidak menyebutkan ketentuan tentang pengasuhan anak. Artinya, Surat Edaran Mahkamah Agung Nomor 4 Tahun 2016 belum mampu melindungi hak anak dan hal perempuan dalam kasus perceraian. Data pengadilan yang digunakan dalam penelitian ini, menyebutkan hanya 14% yang mewajibkan ayah untuk mengasuh anak setelah perceraian. Persentase ini hampir sama dengan keputusan yang dikeluarkan sebelum keluarnya keputusan tersebut, yaitu hanya 12% pada 2016, dan 14% pada 2017.
The terrorist or ex-terrorist wives in Solo have experienced diverse conditions after their husband officially becomes a terrorist prisoner who has been lived in jail. The Rights of Wife in Law No. 1 of 1974 about Marriage among terrorist wives in Solo have sharpened the analysis on how their level of perception of the wife’s rights that regulated by Law No. 10 of 1974. This study aims to reveal the reality of cases that took place with terrorist wives related to the fulfillment of their rights as a wife regulated by law, and to categorize their marital status related to the validity in a positive law (whether the marriage is registered or not in The Office of Religious Affairs (KUA)). Besides, this paper also wants to explore the terrorist wives' understanding who are legally married in KUA regarding their rights which are highly protected by the law. This research uses a qualitative method which aimed to find concepts and theories, and library research by applying the empirical or sociological legal approach. Data sources used are Primary Data, namely the terrorist prisoner’s wives in Solo, and secondary data from the Marriage Law (Law No. 1 of 1974), Compilation of Islamic Law (KHI), books, journals, articles, views of legal experts, and the results of other paper and writings related to the problems that become the subject in this research discussion. The descriptive data analysis method aims to figure out systematically, factually and accurately the facts about the understanding of terrorist wives related to their rights in the Marriage Law (Law No. 1 of 1974). After analyzing and interpreting the existing data, it can be concluded that the terrorist prisoner wives in Central Java have a fairly good understanding of their rights as wives regulated in Law No. 1 of 1974. If only there are rights that undermanned by them for the unfulfilled obligations by the husband, then it is caused by their sincerity attitude towards the husband status who becomes a prisoner. The religious doctrine that is strong enough makes the prisoner’s wife do not ask many of her rights, both physical and mental rights that are not well fulfilled. For them, the status of a husband to become a terrorist prisoner is a Shari reason which consequences must be accepted sincerely.Keywords: Understanding, wife's rights, Terrorist Prisoner’s Wives
This study analyzes 64 decisions of the South Jakarta Religious Courts, issued in 2011-2013, to see how ultra petitum partium principle is used to settle a child support claim in a divorce case. Child protection lawsuit is a legal solution given by the law to force fathers to carry out their obligations to fulfil their children's livelihood. In the Religious Courts, the case can be done simultaneously with a divorce case or done separately. In this study, the author argues that in deciding children’s livelihood claims, judges in the Religious Courts, besides having to comply with the applicable procedural law, should also follow basic principles applied in the General Court. This is based on article 54 of Law No. 7 of 1989 (amended by Law No. 3 of 2006 and Law No. 50 of 2009). One of the principles is ultra petitum partium, in which the judges are prohibited from deciding a matter that is not stated in the lawsuit or decide more than what is demanded. From 64 decisions, 60 of them applied the ultra petitum partium principle. In this case, none of them decided to order the fathers to pay for children supports, even though the posita mentions that children were born during their marriage, and the children are with the mothers.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.