Analisis Yuridis Penentuan Kedudukan Saksi Pelaku sebagai Justice Collaborators dalam Tindak Pidana Narkotika di Pengadilan Negeri Pematang Siantar (Studi Putusan No: 231/Pid.Sus/2015/PN Pms.)

Abstract

 Judge's Ruling in Pematang Siantar District Court No. 231/Pid. Sus/2015/PN Pms decides lighter sentence than the prosecutor's claim because the defendant is considered a justice collaborator. A defendant is considered to be a Justice Collaborator by Pematang Siantar District Court because he has helped as a witness and revealed the main narcotic dealer and the networks involved in the distribution of narcotics in Pematang Siantar and Simalungun District. The Judge considered that the defendant's testimony as a justice collaborator of being cooperative. This case encourages a need to study the judge's legal consideration in deciding the narcotic perpetrator as a justice collaborator in Pematang Siantar District Court. It needs to study whether the ruling which says that the narcotic perpetrator as a justice collaborator has been in accordance with the objective of the conviction. This is a normative research with descriptive analysis which describes and analyzes simultaneously a phenomenon related to the Determination of Justice Collaborator in the Narcotic Crime in Pematang Siantar District Court (A Study on the Ruling No. 231/Pid.Sus/2015/PN Pms). The results show that the Judge's legal consideration in deciding the narcotic perpetrator as a justice collaborator in Pematang Siantar District Court by the Ruling No. 231/Pid.Sus/2015/PN Pms is Article 10 of the Law No. 13/2006 on Witness and Victim Protection, and SEMA (Form Letter of the Supreme Court) No. 04/2011 on the Treatment to Whistleblower and Justice Collaborator. This SEMA states that a Justice Collaborator is one of a particular perpetrators confesses the crime that he has committed, he is not the main perpetrator and gives a testimony as a witness in the hearing process. The determination of the request status is made in the investigation stage by the police and the prosecutor states it in the claim in the court. However, the judge made a mistake in his/her legal consideration because there was a change in the prevailing laws and regulations i.e. Article 10 of the Law No. 31/2014 on the Changes in the Law No. 13/2006 concerning Witness and Victim Protection. The sentence convicted to the defendant as a justice collaborator in in deciding the narcotic perpetrator as a justice collaborator in Pematang Siantar District Court by the Ruling No. 231/Pid.Sus/2015/PN Pms was not in accordance with the objective of the conviction which is a collaboration theory because the Judge has neglected the prevailing laws and regulations. The status determination as a justice collaborator is the authorization of Witness and Victim Protection Institution. Negligence to the laws and regulations does not bring a good change and compensation to the narcotic perpetrator as expected in the collaboration theory. The Judge should have been more careful in implementing the laws in his legal considerations because a mistake in the law implementation like what was done by the judge will make people doubtful and tend to disbelieve the law enforcement in Indonesia, and it forms a new law particularly for justice collaborator so that the judge will not be tyrannical in implementing legal provisions. It is expected that the objective of conviction in in deciding the narcotic perpetrator as a justice collaborator in Pematang Siantar District Court be achieved maximally, the Judge pay more attention to the objective of conviction i.e. the collaboration theory which is not only about compensation but more about improvement in the narcotic perpetrator's behavior.