Studi Kasus Tentang Pembebasan Terdakwa Atas Dakwaan Persetubuhan Terhadap Anak

Case Study Concerning the Acquittal of a Defendant on Charges of Sexual Relations with a Child

Setiap anak berhak atas kelangsungan hidup, tumbuh dan berkembang serta berhak atas perlindungan dari kekerasan dan diskriminasi. Kenyataannya sering dijumpai anak menjadi korban kejahatan, dan aparat penegak hukum dalam memeriksa dan mengadili kurang memberikan perlindungan hak-hak anak. Pemeriksaan perkara pidana diawali dari dakwaan jaksa penuntut Umum.Permasalahan apakah dakwaan JPU sudah sesuai dengan perbuatan terdakwa dalam Putusan PN Makassar No.77/Pid.Sus/2022/PN.Mks, pembebasan terdakwa dari segala dakwaan jaksa dan apa akibat hukum dakwaan JPU yang tidak sesuai dengan perbuatan terdakwa dalam Putusan PN Makasar dalam Putusannya No. 77/Pid.Sus/2022/PN Mks, tentang pembebasan terdakwa dari segala dakwaan jaksa. Metode yang digunakan dalam penelitian ini yuridis normatif dengan pendekatan peraturan perundang-undangan, pendekatan konsep dan menelaah putusan pengadilan yang telah mempunyai kekuatan hukum tetap. Hasil penelitian disimpulkan JPU membuat surat dakwaan tersusun secara alternatif, terdakwa yang melakukan perbuatan pidana meremas dan menjilat Payudara korban secara bergantian setelah itu membuka celana korban, yang berarti telah melakukan tindak pidana pencabulan melanggar Pasal 82 UUPA. Ketika pelaku memasukkan kedalam kemaluan, namun pelaku tidak dapat ereksi karena penyakitpenyakit gula sebagai perbuatan melanggar kesusilaan. Akibat hukum dakwaan JPU yang tidak sesuai dengan perbuatan terdakwa, maka terdakwa dibebaskan dari segala tuntutan hukum Putusan hakim yang menyatakan terdakwa tidak terbukti melakukan tindak pidana sebagaimana dakwaan jaksa penuntut umum melanggar Pasal 81 UUPA tel;ah tepat dan kesalahan ada pada jaksa penuntut umum dalam membuat dakwaan secara alternatif, seharusnya didakwa dalam dakwaan lebih subsider melanggar Pasal 82 UUPA. 

Every child has the right to survive, grow and develop and has the right to protection from violence and discrimination. In reality, it is often found that children are victims of crime, and law enforcement officials in examining and adjudicating do not provide enough protection for children's rights. The examination of criminal cases begins with the indictment of the Public Prosecutor. The issue is whether the prosecutor's indictment is in accordance with the defendant's actions in the Makassar District Court Decision No.77/Pid.Sus/2022/PN.Mks, the defendant's acquittal from all the prosecutor's charges and what are the legal consequences of the prosecutor's indictment which is not in accordance with the defendant's actions in the Makasar District Court Decision in The decision no. 77/Pid.Sus/2022/PN Mks, regarding the acquittal of the defendant from all the prosecutor's charges. The method used in this research is normative juridical with a statutory regulation approach, a conceptual approach and examining court decisions that have permanent legal force. The results of the research concluded that the prosecutor prepared an alternative indictment, the defendant who committed the criminal act of squeezing and licking the victim's breasts alternately then opened the victim's trousers, which means he had committed a criminal act of sexual immorality in violation of Article 82 of the UUPA. When the perpetrator inserts it into the genitals, but the perpetrator cannot get an erection because of diabetes, this is an act of violating decency. As a legal consequence of the prosecutor's indictment not being in accordance with the defendant's actions, the defendant was acquitted of all legal charges. The judge's decision which stated that the defendant was not proven to have committed a criminal act as the public prosecutor's indictment violated Article 81 of the UUPA was correct and the mistake lay with the public prosecutor in making it. alternatively, the indictment should be charged in a more subsidiary indictment for violating Article 82 of the UUPA.