Analisis Yuridis terhadap Putusan Hakim dalam Perkara Tindak Pidana Penggunaan Bahan Kimia dan Larangan Penggunaan Bahan Kimia (Studi Putusan Pengadilan Negeri Nomor 100/Pid.B/2022/PN Lgs)

Abstract

The use of chemicals in the form of hazardous substances which are added to food additives such as formalin and borax, clearly endangers the safety of the consumers, so that the actions of the perpetrators deserve serious criminal sanctions, but in the District Court Decision Number 100/Pid.B/2022/ PN Lgs. Establish MISWARDI Bin USMAN as a suspect by producing food for distribution by deliberately using materials that are prohibited in food, based on evidence and evidence of the Defendant's actions proven to have violated Article 136 in conjunction with Article 75 which according to the rules has exceeded the usage dose, but in the Judge's Decision, the Judge in impose too light a penalty. So that the researchers drew the formulation of the problem including: How to Regulate Law, Criminal Liability Against Offenders Using Chemicals and Prohibition on the Use of Chemicals, and Application of Criminal Law Against Judges' Decisions in Crimes where the problem is that the researcher conducted a juridical analysis on District Court Decision Number 100/ Pid.B/2022/PN Lgs. The research method used is a normative legal research method. normative research by collecting data is carried out by library research, namely legal research carried out by examining library materials or secondary data in Decision Number 100/Pid.B/2022/PN Lgs. The results of the study show that seen from the aspect of legal justice, especially the sense of justice towards the defendant in the Decision of the Langsa District Court Number 100/Pid.B/2022/Pn Lgs is not quite right. As the responsibility that must be carried out by the Defendant in Article 136 of the Law on Food with Elements, whoever, produces food for distribution, intentionally uses materials that are prohibited from being used as food additives. Based on the verdict in this case, the author concludes that, the judge as a law enforcement officer in charge of giving a verdict on the defendant still provides sanctions that are too light, so according to the author, the verdict given by the panel of judges does not and/or does not yet reflect law enforcement as Indonesia is a rule of law. which is based on Article 1 paragraph (3) of the 1945 Constitution.