JURIDICAL STUDY ON VERDICT NUMBER 275/PID.SUS/2019/PN.SBY ABOUT DEFAMATION

Pada putusan No.275/PID.SUS/2019/PN.SBY mengenai Penghinaan dan/atau Pencemaran Nama Baik di Media Sosial Permasalahan yang timbul adalah ketidaksesuaian putusan dengan pasal yang didakwakan. Pasal yang didakwakan adalah Pasal 45 ayat (3) jo pasal 27 ayat (3) Undang-Undang No.19 tahun 2016 tentang perubahan atas UU No.11 Tahun 2008 tentang Informasi dan Transaksi Elektronik tetapi berdasarkan fakta persidangkan menunjukkan bahwa hakim tidak mempertimbangkan aspek yuridis dan non yuridis. Tujuan penelitian ini adalah untuk menganalisis aspek yuridis dan non yuridis sebagai dasar pertimbangan hakim pada putusan No.275/PID.SUS/2019/PN.SBY tentang Penghinaan dan/atau Pencemaran Nama Baik di Media Sosial dan Independensi Hakim dalam Memutus Perkara. Penelitian ini menggunakan metode penelitian yuridis normatif, dengan menggunakan pengumpulan data dengan studi  Pustaka dengan pendekatan undang-undang, pendekatan kasus,dan pendekatan konsep. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa pertimbangan hakim pada putusan No.275/PID.SUS/2019/PN.SBY tidak memperhatikan segi yuridis dan non yuridis. Aspek yuridis  berdasarkan Pasal 197 ayat (1) huruf d KUHAP, hakim tidak memperhatikan keterangan terdakwa, keterangan saksi dan barang bukti yang telah diungkapkan dalam persidangan. Hakim hanya berfokus pada dakwaan penuntut umum, pasal-pasal yang terkait dengan tindak pidana terdakwa sedangkan berdasarkan pertimbangan non yuridis hakim tidak mempertimbangkan latar belakang perbuatan terdakwa dan kondisi terdakwa. Selain hal tersebut hakim juga belum menerapkan independensial praktis nyata dalam membuat putusan, dikarenakan adanya pengaruh pihak lain dalam penyelesaian perkara.

Kata Kunci: UU ITE, Penghinaan dan/atau Pencemaran Nama Baik di Media Sosial, Penghinaan di media social

In decision No.275 / PID.SUS / 2019 / PN.SBY regarding Slander and / or Defamation on Social Media The problem that arises is the inconsistency of the decision with the article being accused. The article that was charged was Article 45 paragraph (3) in conjunction with Article 27 paragraph (3) of Law No. 19 of 2016 concerning amendments to Law No.11 of 2008 concerning Electronic Information and Transactions but based on the facts the trial showed that the judge did not consider juridical aspects and non juridical. The purpose of this study was to analyze juridical and non-juridical aspects as a basis for judges 'consideration in decision No.275 / PID.SUS / 2019 / PN.SBY regarding Defamation and / or Defamation on Social Media and Judges' Independence in Deciding Cases. This study uses a normative juridical research method, using data collection with literature study with a statutory approach, a case approach, and a conceptual approach. The results showed that the judges' considerations in decision No.275 / PID.SUS / 2019 / PN.SBY did not pay attention to juridical and non-juridical aspects. The juridical aspect based on Article 197 paragraph (1) letter d of the Criminal Procedure Code, the judge does not pay attention to the testimony of the defendant, witness testimony and evidence that has been disclosed in court. The judge only focused on the indictment of the public prosecutor, articles related to the criminal act of the defendant, while based on non-juridical considerations the judge did not consider the background of the defendant's actions and the condition of the defendant. Apart from that, judges have also not implemented real practical independence in making decisions, due to the influence of other parties in solving cases.

Keywords: ITE Law, Insult and / or Defamation on Social Media, Insult on social media