Sejak diterbitkannya Undang-Undang Sistem Peradilan Pidana Anak (UU SPPA), ditemukan beberapa permasalahan dalam penerapannya, diantaranya yaitu adanya putusan hakim yang dijatuhkan terhadap anak yang berkonflik dengan hukum yang tidak mempertimbangkan rekomendasi laporan penelitian kemasyarakatan. Selain itu, dalam putusan Hakim seringpula dijumpai adanya perbedaan dan tidak dituliskannya secara lengkap fakta dan keadaan beserta alat pembuktian yang diperoleh dari pemeriksaan di sidang sebagaimana dimaksud Pasal 197 ayat (1) huruf d KUHAP.

Melalui penelitian yuridis normative dan mengumpulkan bahan hukum serta menelaahnya menggunakan beberapa pendekatan penelitian, maksud Penulis mengambil penelitian ini adalah untuk menganalisa putusan hakim yang tidak mempertimbangkan rekomendasi penelitian litmas dalam putusannya dan bagaimana upaya perlindungan terhadap anak apabila putusan hakim tidak mempertimbangkan hal tersebut.

Putusan Pengadilan Negeri Surabaya Nomor: 23/Pid.Sus-Anak/2023/PN.Sby tanggal 14 Juni 2023 belum memenuhi ketentuan Pasal 197 ayat (1) huruf d KUHAP serta belum memberikan perlindungan bagi anak, karena rekomendasi dalam Laporan Penelitian Kemasyarakatan (Litmas) tidak diikuti seluruhnya dan pertimbangan hakim yang termuat dalam putusan tidak sesuai dengan alat bukti yang ada. Seharusnya aparat penegak hukum selalu berpedoman dengan ketentuan perundang-undangan dan pemerintah wajib menyediakan pendidikan kepada aparat penegak hukum untuk meningkatkan pengetahuan tentang sistem peradilan pidana anak.

Since the issuance of the Child Criminal Justice System Law (UU SPPA), several problems have been found in its implementation, including the existence of judges' decisions imposed on children in conflict with the law that do not consider the recommendations of community research reports. In addition, in the judge's decision, there are often differences and incomplete writing of the facts and circumstances along with the evidence obtained from the examination at the trial as referred to in Article 197 paragraph (1) letter d of the Criminal Procedure Code.

Through normative legal research and collecting legal materials and examining them using several research approaches, the author's intention in taking this research is to analyze judges' decisions that do not consider recommendations from community research in their decisions and how to protect children if the judge's decision does not consider this.

The Decision of the Surabaya District Court Number: 23/Pid.Sus- Anak/2023/PN.Sby dated June 14, 2023 has not fulfilled the provisions of Article 197 paragraph (1) letter d of the Criminal Procedure Code and has not provided protection for children, because the recommendations in the Community Research Report (Litmas) were not followed in their entirety and the judge's considerations contained in the decision did not correspond to the available evidence. Law enforcement officers should always be guided by statutory provisions and the government is obliged to provide education to law enforcement officers to increase knowledge about the juvenile criminal justice system.