Article Per Year (5 Year)
p-Index From 2021 - 2026
0.444
P-Index
This Author published in this journals
All Journal University Of Bengkulu Law Journal Law Journal
Desy Ervitasari
Universitas Muhammadiyah Bengkulu
Law, Crime, Criminology & Criminal Justice

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

Found 2 Documents
Search

 1 
LEGAL REASONING DISSENTING OPINION HAKIM DALAM PENERAPAN PASAL 2 AYAT 1 UU TPPO PADA PROSTITUSI ANAK Desy Ervitasari; Riri Tri Mayasari
University Of Bengkulu Law Journal Vol. 10 No. 2 (2025): October
Publisher : UNIB Press

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.33369/ubelaj.v10i2.47976

Abstract

This research examines the disparities in legal reasoning within the Manna District Court Decision Number 00/Pid.Sus/2025/PN Mna regarding the application of Article 2, Paragraph 1 of the Law on the Eradication of the Crime of Trafficking in Persons (TIP Law) in cases of child prostitution. The central legal issue lies in the conflicting interpretations of the elements of "recruitment/receipt," "vulnerable position," and "child consent" in determining the existence of sexual exploitation. This study aims to analyze the arguments presented in the dissenting opinion that rejected the application of Article 2, Paragraph 1 of the TIP Law and to evaluate their alignment with legal norms and child protection objectives. This is a normative legal research employing statutory, conceptual, and case study approaches. The findings indicate that the majority of the judicial panel adopted a child protection approach based on the lex specialis principle, emphasizing that the victim's status as a child constitutes a vulnerable position that cannot be waived by consent; thus, the element of exploitation is deemed fulfilled. Conversely, the dissenting opinion positioned coercion or power relations as the primary indicators of trafficking and tended to qualify the act as a general crime against morality (decency). This study concludes that these disparities underscore the necessity for consistent interpretation of "vulnerable position" and "child consent" to ensure that the application of the TIP Law is not narrowed down to mere general moral offenses.
KEBEBASAN MENYAMPAIKAN PENGADUAN VERSUS PERINTANGAN PENYIDIKAN: ANALISIS RATIO DECIDENDI PUTUSAN KASASI NOMOR 6644 K/PID.SUS/2024 desy ervitasari; Riri Tri Mayasari
Law Journal (LAJOUR) Vol 7 No 2 (2026): Law Journal (LAJOUR) Juni 2026
Publisher : LPPM Universitas Bina Insan

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.32767/lajour.v7i2.671

Abstract

Hak warga negara menyampaikan pengaduan merupakan kebebasan konstitusional yang dijamin UUD 1945, namun kerap berbenturan dengan penerapan delik perintangan penyidikan (Pasal 21 UU Tipikor). Ketegangan ini terlihat dalam Putusan Mahkamah Agung Nomor 6644 K/Pid.Sus/2024, di mana pengaduan oleh advokat justru dijadikan dasar dakwaan perintangan penyidikan. Penelitian ini bertujuan mengkaji pengaturan normatif kebebasan menyampaikan pengaduan dan batas penerapan delik perintangan, serta menganalisis rasio keputusan Mahkamah Agung dalam putusan tersebut. Penelitian hukum normatif ini menggunakan pendekatan peraturan-undangan, kasus, dan konteks. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa Pasal 21 UU Tipikor harus memperbarui secara restriktif dengan memperhatikan unsur niat khusus ( mens rea ) serta hambatan materi yang nyata ( obstruksi materiil ). Pengaduan yang diberikan beritikad baik tidak dapat dikualifikasikan sebagai tindak pidana perintangan. Kesimpulannya, putusan kasasi bebas ini memperkuat perlindungan hak konstitusional warga negara sekaligus meneguhkan prinsip rule of law dan hak asasi manusia dalam sistem hukum pidana Indonesia.
Co-Authors Riri Tri Mayasari Riri Tri Mayasari