Melola Discovery

← Melola Discovery

Jurnal

DISPARITAS PUTUSAN TERHADAP PERKARA TINDAK PIDANA KORUPSI DI KABUPATEN BOMBANA (Studi Kasus Putusan Perkara Nomor 48/Pid.Sus/TPK/2015/ PN. Kdi Dan Perkara Nomor 05/Pid.Sus /TPK/2016/PN.Kdi)

Sultra Law Review · Vol. ume No. mor (2024) · pp. 320–338

ISSN
2685-208X
Published
2024-11-17
Publisher
Fakultas Hukum Universitas Sulawesi Tenggara
Language
eng

Abstract

This study aims to determine the factors causing the disparity in the verdict of the Panel of Judges of the Kendari District Court in the verdict of the corruption case against case Number: 05 / Pid.Sus / TPK / 2016 / PN.Kdi. And Case Decision No. 48 / Pid.Sus / TPK / 2015 / PN.Kdi). (2). To find out what is the basis for the emergence of disparity in the verdict in case Number: 05 / Pid.Sus / TPK / 2016 / PN.Kdi. And Case Decision No. 48 / Pid.Sus / TPK / 2015 / PN.Kdi). This study was conducted at the Kendari District Court Office with the consideration that the institution is a First Level Judicial Institution that decides on Corruption Cases in the Southeast Sulawesi Jurisdiction Area. The type of field research is in the form of interviews with the Panel of Judges at the Kendari Corruption Court and literature. This research is also descriptive analytical in nature where the content is created and arranged systematically and comprehensively. This descriptive analysis is included to describe all data obtained related to the research title clearly and in detail which is then analyzed to answer the existing problems. The results of the study indicate that the cause of the disparity in decisions in the two cases is a legal factor, that the provisions in Law Number 31 of 1999 concerning the Eradication of Corruption as amended by Law Number 20 of 2001, recognize the existence of maximum and minimum penalties so that to determine the severity of the sentence imposed is entirely left to the judge so that disparity in decisions is certain to occur, both law enforcement officers, in terms of the Public Prosecutor's Demands, in the indictment the two defendants were charged with alternative charges with the same article but in different charges, and the Panel of Judges who examined the two cases in making their decisions solely based on the Public Prosecutor's indictment without considering the facts in the trial so that the two decisions of the case regarding the length of imprisonment and the fines imposed were very different.

Collaboration network of the authors

40 authors · 104 co-authorship links · showing the 40 most connected

Hover or tap a name to highlight its co-authors. Double-click to open the author's page.

  • Universitas Sulawesi Tenggara
  • Affiliation unknown
  • Different organisations
  • Same organisation
  • Affiliation unknown
  • Thicker line = more joint articles · bigger circle = more articles
Show as table
Co-authorOrganisationJoint articles
St. Fatmawati. L.Affiliation unknown18
Basoddin BasoddinUniversitas Sulawesi Tenggara17
St. Fatmawati .LUniversitas Sulawesi Tenggara11
La Ode MuhramUniversitas Sulawesi Tenggara10
Muhammad Azis TahirUniversitas Sulawesi Tenggara9
H.M. Ichlas MappilawaUniversitas Sulawesi Tenggara8
Niken Yulian YusufUniversitas Sulawesi Tenggara6
Muhammad TahirUniversitas Sulawesi Tenggara5
muhammad tahirUniversitas Sulawesi Tenggara3
Lukman LukmanUniversitas Sulawesi Tenggara2
La Ode BariunUniversitas Sulawesi Tenggara2
Bahnud BahnudUniversitas Sulawesi Tenggara2
Arisnawanti ArisnawantiUniversitas Sulawesi Tenggara2
Sutora SutoraUniversitas Sulawesi Tenggara2
Fitrayadi FitrayadiUniversitas Sulawesi Tenggara2
Hery ApriantoUniversitas Sulawesi Tenggara2
Muhammad TahirUniversitas Sulawesi Tenggara2
Wagino MallisaUniversitas Sulawesi Tenggara1
Faisal FaisalUniversitas Sulawesi Tenggara1
Dita SavitriAffiliation unknown1
Evy sariraUniversitas Sulawesi Tenggara1
Muh SiotiUniversitas Sulawesi Tenggara1
Abdul KarimUniversitas Sulawesi Tenggara1
Wa Ode YerniyatiUniversitas Sulawesi Tenggara1
Zainuddin ZainuddinUniversitas Sulawesi Tenggara1
Wayan SupartaUniversitas Sulawesi Tenggara1
Muhammad AnwanUniversitas Sulawesi Tenggara1
Hapit KianUniversitas Sulawesi Tenggara1
Herfan HerfanUniversitas Sulawesi Tenggara1
Irwan MarsukiUniversitas Sulawesi Tenggara1
Samsul ArifinUniversitas Sulawesi Tenggara1
Hanaya RasyidUniversitas Sulawesi Tenggara1
Andri RubiantoUniversitas Sulawesi Tenggara1
Juwanto JuwantoUniversitas Sulawesi Tenggara1
Jusriadi JusriadiUniversitas Sulawesi Tenggara1
D. Rachmat Pratama SAffiliation unknown1
Kadir TitdoyUniversitas Sulawesi Tenggara1

Affiliations come from OpenAlex; journal OAI-PMH metadata carries none. Authors without an OpenAlex ID are matched by name, which can merge or split people.

Metadata source: OAI-PMH (metadata jurnal) https://jurnal-unsultra.ac.id/index.php/sulrev/oai, first harvested 30 Okt 2026, last seen 30 Okt 2026.
Original metadata (oai_dc) 
<oai_dc:dc xmlns="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:oai_dc="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc/" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xsi:schemaLocation="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc/  http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc.xsd">
	<dc:title xml:lang="en-US">DISPARITAS PUTUSAN TERHADAP PERKARA TINDAK PIDANA KORUPSI DI KABUPATEN BOMBANA  (Studi Kasus Putusan Perkara Nomor 48/Pid.Sus/TPK/2015/ PN. Kdi Dan Perkara Nomor 05/Pid.Sus /TPK/2016/PN.Kdi)</dc:title>
	<dc:creator>Alhadist, Alhadist</dc:creator>
	<dc:creator>Niasa, La</dc:creator>
	<dc:creator>Faisal, Amir</dc:creator>
	<dc:description xml:lang="en-US">This study aims to determine the factors causing the disparity in the verdict of the Panel of Judges of the Kendari District Court in the verdict of the corruption case against case Number: 05 / Pid.Sus / TPK / 2016 / PN.Kdi. And Case Decision No. 48 / Pid.Sus / TPK / 2015 / PN.Kdi). (2). To find out what is the basis for the emergence of disparity in the verdict in case Number: 05 / Pid.Sus / TPK / 2016 / PN.Kdi. And Case Decision No. 48 / Pid.Sus / TPK / 2015 / PN.Kdi). This study was conducted at the Kendari District Court Office with the consideration that the institution is a First Level Judicial Institution that decides on Corruption Cases in the Southeast Sulawesi Jurisdiction Area. The type of field research is in the form of interviews with the Panel of Judges at the Kendari Corruption Court and literature. This research is also descriptive analytical in nature where the content is created and arranged systematically and comprehensively. This descriptive analysis is included to describe all data obtained related to the research title clearly and in detail which is then analyzed to answer the existing problems. The results of the study indicate that the cause of the disparity in decisions in the two cases is a legal factor, that the provisions in Law Number 31 of 1999 concerning the Eradication of Corruption as amended by Law Number 20 of 2001, recognize the existence of maximum and minimum penalties so that to determine the severity of the sentence imposed is entirely left to the judge so that disparity in decisions is certain to occur, both law enforcement officers, in terms of the Public Prosecutor's Demands, in the indictment the two defendants were charged with alternative charges with the same article but in different charges, and the Panel of Judges who examined the two cases in making their decisions solely based on the Public Prosecutor's indictment without considering the facts in the trial so that the two decisions of the case regarding the length of imprisonment and the fines imposed were very different.</dc:description>
	<dc:publisher xml:lang="en-US">Fakultas Hukum Universitas Sulawesi Tenggara</dc:publisher>
	<dc:date>2024-11-17</dc:date>
	<dc:type>info:eu-repo/semantics/article</dc:type>
	<dc:type>info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion</dc:type>
	<dc:type xml:lang="en-US">Peer-reviewed Article</dc:type>
	<dc:format>application/pdf</dc:format>
	<dc:identifier>https://jurnal-unsultra.ac.id/index.php/sulrev/article/view/732</dc:identifier>
	<dc:source xml:lang="en-US">Sultra Law Review; Volume 01 Nomor 02, Oktober 2019; 320 - 338</dc:source>
	<dc:source>2685-208X</dc:source>
	<dc:language>eng</dc:language>
	<dc:relation>https://jurnal-unsultra.ac.id/index.php/sulrev/article/view/732/445</dc:relation>
	<dc:rights xml:lang="en-US">Copyright (c) 2019 Sultra Law Review</dc:rights>
</oai_dc:dc>