Disparity of Sentencing in Violent Crimes Which Was Carried out by Child Defendant in the Jurisdiction of Padang Panjang District Court (Case Study: The Verdict of the Supreme Court No. 957 K/Pid.Sus/2020 and the Verdict of the Supreme Court No: 968 K/Pid.Sus/2020)

Abstract

Until now, criminal sentencing is still considered as the best solution in giving deterrent effect for the criminals, including for children who commit the felony. Based on several aspects, this criminal sentencing sometimes is not justified by adequate judicial consideration, including also the existence of unequal or unbalanced criminal convictions by judges, which is known as “disparity of sentencing”, as one of the forms an embodiment of independence discretion owned by a judge when they handle criminal cases. This disparity brings its own problems in law enforcement in Indonesia. As it happened in the case of the persecution that occurs in cases in Nurul Ikhlas Islamic Boarding Schools in 2019, it was discovered that one of the seventeen juveniles was given imprisonment on a trial, even though he played the minor role in the incident of the persecution, meanwhile the other sixteen juveniles were only given conditional sentences, even though they have more significant roles in causing the death of the victim. The type of the research in this thesis is juridical normative law research, by using secondary data in the form of related documents. The aims of the research are to reveal the basic consideration of the judges in passing the difference criminal decisions and the law consequences especially for the child defendant. It was found that, this disparity of sentencing is occurred not only because the subjective point of view of the judges (which are affected by the judge’s knowledge and the judge's inaccuracy in examining the case), but also because of unimplemented of the Circular Letter of the Supreme Court No. 7/2012 about Legal Formulation of the Results of the Plenary Meeting of the Supreme Court Chamber as a Guideline for the Implementation of Duties for the Court, by the registrar young special crimes to the supreme court. The negative impacts of the application of this criminal disparity for the defendant is the emergence of the sense of unfairness treated by a judge, meanwhile for public community is bringing up a social jealousy of the community in judicial institutions, which are then be reflected in the form of indifference on law enforcement in the community. It is expected that supervision against the implementation of the Circular Letter of the Supreme Court No. 7/2012 could be more maximized, as to prevent the occurrence of disparity criminal sentences which might put the defendant as the lost party in law enforcement process.