Article Per Year (5 Year)
p-Index From 2021 - 2026
0.444
P-Index
This Author published in this journals
All Journal Jurnal Yudisial Mawaddah: Jurnal Hukum Keluarga Islam
Heni Susanti
Islamic University of Riau
Religion Environmental Science Law, Crime, Criminology & Criminal Justice Social Sciences

Published : 2 Documents Claim Missing Document
Claim Missing Document
Check
Articles

Found 2 Documents
Search

 1 
Socioeconomic Inequality and Judicial Disparities In Drug Sentencing: A Mixed-Methods Study on Rehabilitation vs Imprisonment In Indonesia Kasmanto Rinaldi; Heni Susanti; Suyatno Ladiqi; Dita Fisdian Adni
Mawaddah: Jurnal Hukum Keluarga Islam Vol 4 No 1 (2026): Mei
Publisher : Universitas Muhammadiyah Bandung

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.52496/mjhki.v4i1.87

Abstract

Drug-related arrests in Indonesia frequently result in disparate legal outcomes influenced by extralegal determinants, raising concerns about fairness and consistency within the national drug policy framework. This study examines the factors shaping judicial decisions between rehabilitation and imprisonment within the Indonesian legal system. Employing a mixed-methods design, the research integrates quantitative analysis of secondary data derived from judicial decisions and reports of the National Narcotics Agency (BNN) covering the period 2019–2024, with qualitative insights obtained through in-depth interviews, analyzed using NVivo 12. The analysis is grounded in critical criminology and Islamic legal principles, particularly maqāṣid al-sharī‘ah. Within this framework, “systemic bias” is operationalized as patterned disparities in sentencing outcomes associated with extralegal factors, including socioeconomic status and drug type. The findings indicate that individuals from lower socioeconomic backgrounds and those involved with synthetic drugs are significantly more likely to receive custodial sentences, whereas defendants from higher socioeconomic groups or associated with traditional substances are more frequently directed toward rehabilitation programs. These disparities reflect structural inequalities that undermine both legal rationality and the normative objectives of justice, including the protection of life, intellect, and social welfare as emphasized in maqāṣid al-sharī‘ah. To address these issues, the study advocates for comprehensive legal reforms, including the standardization of sentencing guidelines, expanded access to rehabilitation services, strengthened inter-agency coordination, and a shift toward a harm-reduction approach to promote a more equitable system of drug law enforcement in Indonesia.
PENALARAN HAKIM TENTANG PENYERTAAN TINDAK PIDANA DALAM KASUS KORUPSI PENGADAAN VIDEOTRON M. Musa; Heni Susanti
Jurnal Yudisial Vol. 15 No. 1 (2022): ARBITRIO IUDICIS
Publisher : Komisi Yudisial RI

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.29123/jy.v15i1.529

Abstract

ABSTRAK Hakim menggunakan dua jenis ajaran penyertaan dalam melakukan penalaran perluasan pemidanaan. Ajaran pertama memperluas pemidanaan terhadap orang (strafausdehnungsgrund) yang menitikberatkan pertanggungjawaban seseorang terhadap tindak pidana penyertaan. Ajaran kedua memperluas pemidanaan terhadap perbuatan (tatbestandausdehnungsgrund) yang memandang suatu perbuatan sebagai delik dalam penyertaan. Ketentuan norma penyertaan dalam KUHP menjadi persoalan dalam penegakan hukum Undang-Undang Tindak Pidana Korupsi karena menimbulkan diskrepansi hakim dalam menerapkan perluasan pemidanaan dari penyertaan tindak pidana. Penelitian ini mengkaji penalaran hakim terhadap ajaran penyertaan dalam memperluas pemidanaan pada putusan penyertaan tindak pidana korupsi. Penelitian ini merupakan penelitian hukum normatif atau hukum doktrinal karena menggunakan sumber data sekunder yaitu putusan pengadilan/studi kasus tindak pidana korupsi pengadaan videotron di Kementerian Koperasi dan Usaha Kecil Menengah. Data diverifikasi dengan wawancara terhadap hakim, jaksa, advokat, dan ahli hukum serta dengan melakukan diskusi kelompok terpumpun untuk mengetahui taraf sinkronisasi hukum dari putusan yang ada. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan adanya dua variasi penalaran hakim terhadap ajaran penyertaan dalam menentukan perluasan pemidanaan pada putusan penyertaan tindak pidana korupsi. Putusan-putusan pengadilan dari hakim judex facti menentukan perluasan pemidanaan didasarkan pada pandangan perluasan pemidanaan terhadap perbuatan. Penyertaan dipandang sebagai persoalan perbuatan pelaku adalah tindak pidana yang harus dipertanggungjawabkan berupa pemidanaan. Putusan-putusan dari hakim judex juris memandang penyertaan tindak pidana sebagai persoalan pertanggungjawaban untuk memperluas dapat dipidananya seseorang. Putusan-putusan hakim judex facti telah menimbulkan disparitas pemidanaan terhadap peserta tindak pidana.Kata kunci: penalaran hakim; tindak pidana korupsi; penyertaan; perluasan pemidanaan.ABSTRACT Judges use two concepts of complicity in legal reasoning related to sentence expansion. The rst concept expands the punishment of a person (strafausdehnungsgrund), emphasizing a person’s responsibility for complicity. The second concept expands the punishment of an act (tatbestandausdehnungsgrund), viewing it as an offense in complicity. The provisions of the complicity norm in the Criminal Code are a problem in law enforcement of the Anti-Corruption Law because it creates judges’ discretion in implementing the expansion of sentences of complicity. This study discusses the judges’ reasoning on complicity regarding the expansion of sentences of complicity in a corruption case. This study is normative legal research or doctrinal law using secondary data sources, speci cally court decisions/case studies of corruption crime in videotron procurement at the Ministry of Cooperatives and Small-Medium Enterprises. The data were veri ed by interviewing judges, prosecutors, advocates, and legal experts and by conducting a focus group discussion to determine the level of legal synchronization of existing court decisions. The study exhibits two variations of judges’ legal reasoning in determining the expansion of sentences in the decisions on complicity in a corruption case. Judex facti judges’ decisions determine the extension of sentences adhering to the view of expanding punishment for acts. Complicity is perceived as the accomplices’ actions are criminal acts taking the same degree of guilt and punishment. Judex juris judges’ decisions view complicity as a matter of liability to expand a person’s conviction. The judex facti decisions create a disparity of sentences for the accomplices. Keywords: judges’ legal reasoning; corruption crime; complicity; sentence expansion.
Co-Authors Dita Fisdian Adni Kasmanto Rinaldi M. Musa Suyatno Ladiqi