PUTUSAN HAKIM TERHADAP ANAK PELAKU TINDAK PIDANA TERHADAP NYAWA DIHUBUNGKAN DENGAN ASAS KEADILAN

Abstrak

Anak sebagai pelaku tindak pidana terhadap nyawa memerlukan penanganan khusus dalam sistem peradilan pidana anak. Hakim dalam menjatuhkan putusan tidak hanya mempertimbangkan kepastian hukum, tetapi juga asas keadilan dan prinsip kepentingan terbaik bagi anak sebagaimana diatur dalam Undang-Undang Nomor 11 Tahun 2012 tentang Sistem Peradilan Pidana Anak. Tujuan dari penelitian ini yaitu, Untuk menganalisis penerapan asas keadilan dalam putusan hakim terhadap anak pelaku tindak pidana terhadap nyawa berdasarkan Undang-Undang Nomor 11 Tahun 2012 tentang Sistem Peradilan Pidana Anak dan kepentingan terbaik bagi anak. Dalam penelitian ini penulis menggunakan metode pendekatan yuridis normatif. Spesifikasi Penelitian bersifat deksriptif analitis. Jenis data, yaitu data sekunder. Pengumpulan data dilakukan melalui studi kepustakaan (Library Research) terhadap data sekunder. Data yang diperoleh dalam penelitian ini dianalisis dengan menggunakan metode kualitatif. Hasil dari penelitian ini adalah: Pertama, Penerapan asas keadilan dalam putusan hakim terhadap anak pelaku tindak pidana terhadap nyawa menurut UU SPPA menekankan keadilan substantif yang berorientasi pada kepentingan terbaik bagi anak tanpa mengabaikan hak korban dan masyarakat. Keadilan tidak dipahami sebagai pembalasan, melainkan sebagai upaya perlindungan, pembinaan, dan rehabilitasi melalui pendekatan restoratif, dengan pidana penjara sebagai ultimum remedium. Hakim dituntut menyeimbangkan kepentingan pelaku, korban, dan masyarakat melalui pertimbangan yuridis maupun non-yuridis, seperti aspek psikologis, sosial, dan peluang rehabilitasi anak. Namun, dalam praktik masih terdapat ketegangan antara ketentuan UU SPPA dan tuntutan keadilan retributif yang menimbulkan inkonsistensi putusan. Kedua, Pertimbangan hakim dalam kedua putusan menunjukkan bahwa prinsip best interests of the child tidak diterapkan secara absolut, melainkan secara kontekstual dan proporsional dalam kerangka pertanggungjawaban pidana anak. Anak tetap dipandang sebagai subjek yang harus dilindungi dan dibina, namun perlindungan tersebut dibatasi oleh beratnya tindak pidana, dampak terhadap korban, dan tuntutan keadilan masyarakat. Dalam Putusan Nomor X/Pid.Sus-Anak/2024/PN Pnj, hakim cenderung menggunakan pendekatan represif-progresif yang menekankan keadilan substantif dan efek jera melalui terobosan hukum. Sementara itu, Putusan Nomor 0/Pid.Sus-Anak/2024/PN Plg lebih menekankan penerapan normatif sesuai batas maksimum pidana anak, meskipun tetap berorientasi pada pemidanaan. Dengan demikian, penerapan prinsip kepentingan terbaik bagi anak dalam tindak pidana berat belum sepenuhnya bersifat restoratif, melainkan merupakan hasil penyeimbangan antara perlindungan anak, kepentingan korban, dan kepentingan sosial.

Children as perpetrators of crimes against life require special treatment within the juvenile criminal justice system. In rendering decisions, judges are required not only to consider legal certainty, but also the principle of justice and the best interests of the child as regulated under Law Number 11 of 2012 concerning the Juvenile Criminal Justice System. The purpose of this study is to analyze the application of the principle of justice in judicial decisions concerning child perpetrators of crimes against life based on Law Number 11 of 2012 concerning the Juvenile Criminal Justice System and the principle of the best interests of the child. This research employs a normative juridical approach with a descriptive-analytical research specification. The type of data used is secondary data. Data collection was conducted through library research on secondary legal materials. The data obtained were analyzed using a qualitative method. The results of this study indicate two main findings. First, the application of the principle of justice in judicial decisions concerning child perpetrators of crimes against life under the Juvenile Criminal Justice System Law emphasizes substantive justice oriented toward the best interests of the child without disregarding the rights of victims and society. Justice is not perceived merely as retribution, but rather as an effort toward protection, guidance, and rehabilitation through a restorative approach, with imprisonment functioning as an ultimum remedium. Judges are required to balance the interests of the offender, the victim, and society through both juridical and non-juridical considerations, including psychological, social, and rehabilitative aspects of the child. However, in practice, tensions remain between the provisions of the Juvenile Criminal Justice System Law and demands for retributive justice, resulting in inconsistencies in judicial decisions. Second, the judicial considerations in both decisions demonstrate that the principle of the best interests of the child is not applied absolutely, but rather contextually and proportionally within the framework of juvenile criminal responsibility. The child continues to be regarded as a subject entitled to protection and guidance; however, such protection is limited by the severity of the offense, the impact on the victim, and societal demands for justice. In Decision Number X/Pid.Sus-Anak/2024/PN Pnj, the judge tended to adopt a repressive-progressive approach emphasizing substantive justice and deterrence through judicial innovation. Meanwhile, Decision Number 0/Pid.Sus-Anak/2024/PN Plg placed greater emphasis on normative application in accordance with the maximum sentencing limits for juveniles, although it remained punishment-oriented. Therefore, the implementation of the principle of the best interests of the child in serious criminal offenses has not been fully restorative in nature, but rather represents a balancing process between child protection, victims’ interests, and broader social interests.