Publisher

UHBUHB

Journal Jurnal Hukum In ConcretoJurnal Hukum In Concreto Abstract

This research aims to analyze the forms of judicial inconsistency in sentencing theft cases, particularly those involving juvenile offenders, and to identify the contributing factors within Indonesias criminal justice framework. Sentencing disparity often raises serious concerns regarding substantive justice and legal certainty, especially when two cases with nearly identical legal elements and factual backgrounds result in significantly different judgments. This study employs a normative juridical method combined with a case study approach, focusing on two court decisions: Number 14/Pid.B/2011/PN.Yk and Number 10/Pid.SUS-Anak/2015/PN.Yk. Data were collected from statutory instruments, court documents, and judicial reasoning, and analyzed through both normative and sociological lenses. The findings reveal that judicial inconsistency stems from differences in the legal basis applied by judges, the social backgrounds of the offenders, and the uneven consideration of social inquiry reports. Moreover, the unregulated scope of judicial discretion due to the absence of standardized sentencing guidelines has significantly contributed to these disparities. When sentencing is not grounded in clear legal, sociological, and philosophical justification, the ruling loses its legitimacy and may erode public trust in the justice system. This study emphasizes the urgent need for a national sentencing guideline to ensure more consistent, transparent, and accountable sentencing practices within Indonesias legal system, particularly in cases involving vulnerable groups such as juveniles.

Conclusion

The study reveals that judicial inconsistency in theft sentencing, particularly involving juvenile offenders, arises from divergent normative approaches, variations in the offenders social background, and inconsistent application of legal and social assessment instruments.This inconsistency stems from the absence of standardized sentencing guidelines, unregulated judicial discretion, and uneven consideration of social inquiry reports.Establishing a binding and standardized sentencing guideline, strengthening the role of Social Probation Officers, and providing continuous training for judges are crucial steps to address this issue and ensure a fairer and more transparent justice system.

Future Research

Further research should investigate the effectiveness of restorative justice practices in reducing sentencing disparities for juvenile theft cases, exploring how community-based rehabilitation programs can be integrated into the sentencing process. Additionally, a comparative study examining sentencing guidelines in other jurisdictions with similar legal systems could provide valuable insights for developing a national sentencing framework tailored to the Indonesian context. Finally, research is needed to assess the impact of judicial training programs on reducing subjective biases and promoting consistent application of legal principles in sentencing decisions, focusing on the development of standardized evaluation methods for social inquiry reports and offender risk assessments.

References

1. A Normative Analysis of Juvenile Sentencing Laws in Indonesia: Reconciling Justice, Rehabilitation, and... doi.org/10.33258/polit.v3i3.969A Normative Analysis of Juvenile Sentencing Laws in Indonesia Reconciling Justice Rehabilitation and doi 10 33258 polit v3i3 969
2. Implementing Restorative Justice Under the Retributive Paradigm: A Pilot Program Case Study - Patrick... doi.org/10.1177/2158244017691562Implementing Restorative Justice Under the Retributive Paradigm A Pilot Program Case Study Patrick doi 10 1177 2158244017691562
3. Disparitas Hukuman dalam Perkara Pidana Pencurian dengan Pemberatan Putusan Nomor. 782/PID.B/2019/PN.Smg... doi.org/10.58222/juruh.v3i1.772Disparitas Hukuman dalam Perkara Pidana Pencurian dengan Pemberatan Putusan Nomor 782 PID B 2019 PN Smg doi 10 58222 juruh v3i1 772

Metadata

File size	429.69 KB
Pages	13
DMCA	Report