English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

ABSTRAKTindak Pidana Perdagangan Orang telah meluas dalam bentuk jaringan kejahatan baik terorganisir maupun tidak terorganisir. Indonesia sebagai Negara hukum telah memiliki paying hukum terkait dengan Tindak Pidana Perdagangan Orang yaitu UU No. 21 tahun 2007 tentang Pemberantasan Tindak Pidana Perdagangan Orang. Aturan tersebut sebenarnya telah mengatur mengenai pidana minimal khusus, namun kenyataannya masih ada hakim yang memutus di bawah pidana minimal khusus, salah satunya adalah Putusan Nomor 475/Pid.Sus/2018/PN.Bkn jo Putusan Nomor 72/Pid.Sus/2018/PT PBR. Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk mengkaji dan mengetahui kebebasan hakim dalam mengambil putusan terhadap tindak pidana perdagangan orang berdasarkan UU No. 21 Tahun 2007 Tentang Tindak Pidana Perdagangan Orang dengan ancaman pidana minimum khusus pada saat inisert auntuk mengkaji dan mengetahui faktor-faktor yang menyebabkan hakim memutus perkara di bawah sanksi minimum. Metode penelitian pada tesis ini menggunakan jenis penelitian digunakan dalam penulisan hukum ini adalah penelitian hukum normatif, yaitu pendekatan yang dilakukan dengan cara meneliti bahan pustaka atau data sekunder terhadap azas-azas hukum serta studi kasus yang dengan kata lain sering disebut sebagai penelitian hukum kepustakaan. Hasil penelitian dapat dibagi menjadi dua, yaitu: pertama, kebebasan hakim dalam mengambil putusan terhadap tindak pidana perdagangan orang berdasarkan UU No. 21 tahun 2007 tentang Tindak Pidana Perdagangan Orang dengan ancaman pidana minimum khusus menurut Kode Etik dan Pedoman Perilaku Hakim, dapat dilakukan karena hakim harus berperilaku adil. Sedangkan dalam Putusan Nomor 475/Pid.Sus/2018/PN.Bkn jo Putusan Nomor 72/Pid.Sus/2018/PT PBR dikaitkan dengan paradigma positivisme sangatlah bertentangan, sebab tidak memebuhi prinsip bebas nilai serta menjawab pertanyaan why, sehingga jauh dari aturan yang ada. Kedua, Faktor-faktor yang menyebabkan hakim memutus perkara di bawah sanksi minimum ada tiga, yaitu: faktor hukum, faktor pribadi hakim, sertafaktorfaktahukumpersidangan. Terkait Putusan Nomor 475/Pid.Sus/2018/PN.Bkn jo Putusan Nomor 72/Pid.Sus/2018/PT PBR yang diputus di bawah aturan minimum khusus disebabkan karena terdapat keadaan yang meringankan dalam fakta hukum persidanganKata Kunci: kebebasan hakim; tindak pidana perdagangan orang; paradigma positivisme.ABSTRACTHuman Trafficking has expanded in the form of organized and unorganized crime networks. Indonesia as a state of law already has a legal umbrella related to the Law on Elimination of Human Trafficking Crimes (Law No. 21/2007). The regulation has actually regulated the special minimal criminal law, but in reality there are still judges who decide under the special minimal criminal, one of which is Decision Number 475/Pid.Sus/2018/ PN.Bknjo Decision Number 72/Pid.Sus/2018/PT PBR. This study aims to examine and find out the freedom of judges in making decisions against trafficking in persons based on Law on Elimination of Human Trafficking Crimes (Law No. 21/2007) with specific minimum criminal threats at present as well as to examine and find out the factors that have caused judges to decide cases under minimum sanctions.The research method in this thesis uses the type of research used in writing this law is normative legal research, which is an approach carried out by examining library materials or secondary data on legal principles and case studies which in other words are often referred to as library law research. The results of the study can be divided into two, namely: first, the freedom of judges to take decisions on trafficking in persons based Law on Elimination of Human Trafficking Crimes (Law No. 21/2007) with specific minimum criminal threats according to the Code of Ethics and the Code of Conduct for Judges, can be done because judges must behave fairly. Whereas in Decision Number 475/Pid.Sus/2018/ PN.Bknjo Decision Number 72/Pid.Sus/2018/PT PBR is associated with the positivism paradigm is very contradictory, because it does not fulfill the principle of free values and answer the question why, so far from the rules which exists. Second, there are three factors that cause judges to decide a case under a minimum sanction, namely: legal factors, personal factors of judges, as well as legal facts in court proceedings. Regarding Decision Number 475/Pid.Sus/2018/PN.Bknjo Decision Number 72/Pid.Sus/2018/PT PBR which was decided under a special minimum rule is due to a mitigating situation in the legal facts of the trial.Keywords: freedom of judges; criminal trafficking in persons; positivism paradigm.

KEBEBASAN HAKIM DALAM MEMUTUS PERKARA TINDAK PIDANA PERDAGANGAN ORANG DIKAITKAN DENGAN PARADIGMA POSITIVISME HUKUM