Published date: Oct 04 2022

Journal Title: KnE Social Sciences

Issue title: 3rd International Conference on Law Reform (3rd INCLAR)

Pages: 293–305

DOI: 10.18502/kss.v7i15.12098

Rocky Marbunrocky_marbun@univpancasila.ac.idFaculty of Law, Pancasila University, Jakarta, Indonesia

Agus SolichienStudent of Doctoral Program in Law, Borobudur University, Jakarta, Indonesia

Judges as holders of judicial power have been given freedom and independence in resolving disputes in the daily life of every citizen. However, this freedom and independence in judicial power are limited by the existence of sufficient legal considerations as the basis for formulating decisions through an interpretive process based on legal norms and concrete facts in the process of proving before the trial of criminal cases. Despite these limitations, the judge’s ability to make decisions is through communication competence as part of language and legal activities (berrechten). This study used an approach using the concept of Power Relations and Social Praxis. This study aims to find the limitations of communication competence as a form of truth-play from judges through trying and deciding criminal cases. The results of this study indicate that a series of laws and regulations open up opportunities for the disparity in decisions to occur by ignoring the principle of sufficient legal considerations.

Keywords: disparity, sentence, power relations, criminal

[1] Muntoha M. Demokrasi Dan Negara Hukum. J. Huk. Ius Quia Iustum. 2009;16(3):379– 95.

[2] Gaffar JM. Demokrasi Konstitusional. Praktik ketatanegaraan Indonesia Setelah Perubahan UUD 1945. Jakarta: KONPress, 2012.

[3] Wahyono P. Indonesia Negara Berdasarkan Atas Hukum. Jakarta: Ghalia Indonesia; 1986.

[4] Hamzah A. Kemandirian Dan Kemerdekaan Kekuasaan Kehakiman. Denpasar: Makalah Disampaikan Pada Seminar Pembangunan Hukum Nasional VIII Tema Penegakan Hukum Dalam Era Pembangunan Berkelanjutan; 2003.

[5] Lotulung PE. Kebebasan Hakim Dalam Sistem Penegakan Hukum. Denpasar: Makalah Disampaikan Pada Seminar Pembangunan Hukum Nasional VIII Tema Penegakan Hukum Dalam Era Pembangunan Berkelanjutan; 2003.

[6] Rahardjo S. Lapisan-Lapisan Dalam Studi Hukum. Malang: Bayumedia Publishing; 2008.

[7] Arto M. Praktek Perkara Perdata pada Pengadilan Agama. Yogyakarta: Pustaka Pelajar; 2004.

[8] Wicaksana YP. Implementasi Asas Ius Curia Novit Dalam Penafsiran Hukum Putusan Hakim Tentang Keabsahan Penetapan Tersangka. J. Lex Renaiss. 2018;3(1):86–108.

[9] Siregar H. Analisis Disparitas Putusan Hakim Dalam Penjatuhan Pidana Terhadap Tindak Pidana Perjudian. Pranata Huk. 2014;9(1):72–8.

[10] Sugiyono H, Marbun R. “Disparity of Judges’ Decisions in Civil Dispute,” Int. J. Business. Econ. Law. 2019;20(5):127–34.

[11] Komisi Yudisial. Disparitas Putusan Hakim: Identifikasi dan Implikasi. Jakarta: Sekretariat Jendral Komisi Yudisia Republik Indonesia; 2014.

[12] Endicott T. “Legal interpretation,” in The Routledge Companion to Philosophy of Law, A. Marmor, Ed. New York: the Taylor & Francis Group, 2012.

[13] Lorenzini D. “What is a ‘Regime of Truth’?” Le foucaldien, vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 1–5, 2015, https://doi.org/10.16995/lefou.2.

[14] Adlin A. “Michel Foucault: Kuasa/Pengetahuan, (Rezim) Kebenaran, Parrhesia,” JAQFI urnal Aqidah dan Filsafat Islam, vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 13–26, 2016, doi: https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.15575/jaqfi.v1i1.1694.

[15] Marbun R. Dominasi Simbolik Dalam Penegakan Hukum Pidana Berdasarkan Perspektif Pierre-Felix Bourdieu. J. Esensi Huk. 2021;3(1):20–40.

[16] Adib M. Agen dan Struktur dalam Pandangan Piere Bourdieu. BioKultur. 2012;I(2):91– 110.

[17] Gadamer HG. Truth And Method. London, New York: Continuum; 2006.

[18] Susanto AF. Wajah Peradilan Kita: Konstruksi Sosial tentang Penyimpangan Kontrol dan Akuntabilitas Peradilan Pidana. Bandung: Refika Aditama; 2004.

[19] Marbun R, Yuherawan DS, Mulyadi M. Kapita Selekta Penegakan Hukum (Acara) Pidana. Membongkar Tindak Tuturan dan Komunikasi Instrumental Aparat Penegak Hukum dalam Praktik Peradilan Pidana (Buku I). Jakarta: Publica Indonesia Utama; 2021.

[20] Utama JA. Konferensi Pers/Pres Rilis Hasil OTT (Operasi Tangkap Tangan) Untuk Perkara Korupsi. Universitas Airlangga; 2020.

[21] Marbun R. Konferensi Pers Dan Operasi Tangkap Tangan Sebagai Dominasi Simbolik : Membongkar Kesesatan Berpikir Dalam Penegakan Hukum Pidana Press Conference And Hand Catch Operations As Symbolic Domination : Dismantling Fallacy In Criminal Law Enforcement. Ius Const. 2022;7(1):1–18.