CRIMINAL RESPONSIBILITY OF PERPETRATORS OF PUBLIC FACILITY DESTRUCTION (Analysis of Court Decision Number 620/Pid.B/2022/PN.Kisaran)
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.47652/metahukum.v3i2.775Keywords:
Law Enforcement, Destruction, Public FacilitiesAbstract
Background that caused the destruction of public facilities was that the defendant wanted to increase his income as a toilet guard and if the toilet remained in front of the defendant, he felt annoyed because the defendant's income was reduced. So that the defendant's income is sufficient from guarding public toilets, because if in front of residents or buyers or traders do not want to pay or do not want to urinate or defecate in the toilet that the defendant damaged. Criminal liability for prisoners who damage public facilities is that the defendant is sentenced to 9 (nine) months in prison each because the elements of Article 107 paragraph (1) of the Criminal Code have been fulfilled so that the defendant has been proven legally and convincingly guilty of committing a crime of damaging public facilities, so that as a result of his actions, the Manpower, Industry and Trade Service of Batu Bara Regency suffered a loss of around IDR 5,000,000.00 (five million rupiah). The judge's considerations in passing a verdict on the crime of destroying public facilities in Court Decision Number 620/Pid.B/2022/PN Kis are that the Panel of Judges has considerations starting from the demands of the Public Prosecutor, the fulfillment of elements in accordance with the articles charged and there are no justifications and excuses, so that they are found guilty, as well as aggravating and mitigating factors.
References
Huda, Chairul, Dari Tiada Pidana Tanpa Kesalahan Menuju Kepada Tiada Pertanggungjawaban Pidana Tanpa Kesalahan, Prenada Media Group, Jakarta, 2018.
Ibrahim, Johnny, Teori dan Metodologi Penelitian Hukum Normatif, Bayumedia Publishing, Malang, 2018.
Ilyas, Amir, Asas-Asas Hukum Pidana, Yogyakarta, Rengkang Education, Yogyakarta, 2012
Lamintang, P.A.F. Dasar-Dasar Hukum Pidana Indonesia, Citra Adytia Bakti, Bandung, 2014
Marpaung, Leden, Asas Teori Praktik Hukum Pidana, Sinar Grafika, Jakarta, 2012
Prodjohamidjojo, Martiman, Memahami Dasar-Dasar Hukum Pidana Indoesia, Pradnya Paramita, Jakarta, 2007.
Prodjodikoro, R.Wirjono, Tindak-Tindak Pidana Tertentu Dalam KUH.Pidana Indonesia, Eresco, Bandung, 2012.
Soekanto, Soerjono, Pengantar Penelitian Hukum, UI Press, Jakarta, 2016.
Akhyaruddin, A., Marzuki, M., & Mukidi, M. (2023). ANALISIS YURIDIS TINDAK PIDANA PENCUCIAN UANG DARI HASIL TINDAK PIDANA NARKOTIKA (Studi Putusan Mahkamah Agung RI Nomor 250 K/Pid.Sus/2018). Jurnal Meta Hukum, 2(2), 27-38. https://doi.org/10.47652/jmh.v2i2.420
Akhyar, A., Danialsyah, D., & Bukhari, B. (2023). ANALISIS YURIDIS TINDAK PIDANA PEMBUNUHAN DISERTAI PEMERKOSAAN (Analisis Putusan Nomor 271/Pid.B/2019/PN Mrb). Jurnal Meta Hukum, 2(2), 39-50. https://doi.org/10.47652/jmh.v2i2.421
Simalango, D. ., Marzuki, M., & Mukidi, M. (2023). PERTANGGUNGJAWABAN PIDANA OLEH KURATOR ATAS TINDAKANNYA YANG MERUGIKAN BUNDEL PAILIT (Studi Kasus Putusan Pengadilan Negeri Jakarta Pusat Nomor 2081/Pid.B/2011/PN.Jkt.Pst). Jurnal Meta Hukum, 2(2), 51-62. https://doi.org/10.47652/jmh.v2i2.422
.png){kind=logo}
