MENU
|
|
|
| Jenis | : |
KKM
|
| Judul | : |
PUTUSAN LEPAS DARI SEGALA TUNTUTAN HUKUM YANG MENGUBAH PUTUSAN PEMIDANAAN UJARAN KEBENCIAN TERKAIT LINGKUNGAN HIDUP
|
| Subjek | : |
Criminal procedure
|
| Pengarang | : |
Ira Indriya Rahmawati
|
| Pembimbing | : |
Dessi Perdani Yuris Puspita Sari,
Lintang Ario Pambudi
|
| Prodi | : |
ILMU HUKUM
|
| Tahun | : |
2025
|
| Call Number | : |
345.05 RAH p
|
| Perpustakaan | : |
Fakultas Hukum
|
| Letak | : |
1 eksemplar di Koleksi Referensi
|
|
Abstrak :
The judges of the first instance court in this case handed down a verdict of
punishment, then the Defendant appealed and was acquitted of all charges, the first
instance judge erred because he did not consider Anti-Slapp. This study aims to
determine the basis of consideration of the two levels of court in handing down a
verdict to Daniel and the legal consequences arising from the change in the verdict.
The research method used in this research is normative juridical, with case,
conceptual and statutory approaches, then prescriptive specifications. Using
secondary data with literature study data collection presented descriptively
narrative then analyzed with qualitative methods. The result of this study is that the
court of first instance in Decision Number 14/Pid.Sus/2024/Pn Jpa stated that
Daniel's actions were proven to fulfill the elements of the crime of hate speech and
Anti-Slapp could not be applied against him so that he was sentenced to
punishment. Meanwhile, the court of appeal in Decision Number
374/Pid.Sus/2024/PT Smg stated that Daniel's actions were proven to fulfill the
elements of the crime of hate speech, but Anti-Slapp could be applied to him so that
he was sentenced to release from all charges. The legal consequences arising are
that the decision of the court of first instance is void, for that the parties are obliged
to carry out the decision of the court of appeal, the defendant must be released from
detention, the defendant is entitled to the right of rehabilitation to restore his rights,
position and dignity that were previously lost. Evidence that was previously ordered
to be destroyed shall be returned to the defendant. The criminal fine order in the
district court decision becomes void so that the defendant is not obliged to pay it,
resulting in the right for the defendant or public prosecutor to file a cassation and
appeal in the interests of the law.
Keywords: Anti-Slapp environment, Acquittal verdict, Verdict of conviction, Hate
speech offenses.
|
Kembali
|
