<![CDATA[In this study the authors used a research method with a normative juridicalapproach with descriptive analytical research specifications, which was conducted bydescribing what it is about legal events or legal conditions which then draw conclusions from the problem objects associated with legal theories and practice of implementing positive law using secondary data source. The secondary data that the author uses is primary legal material, which is the decision of the Supreme Court at the cassation level and the tertiary legal material in the form of books, journals and scientific papers on law. Based on the results of the study it was concluded that the basis for judges' consideration in applying judex facti and judex juris, in prosecuting criminal cases is because the Supreme Court interpreted Article 253 Paragraph (1) letter a of Law Number 8 of 1981 of KUHAP, because according to the Court Agung to carry out the provisions of the Article the Supreme Court must assess the facts in the hearing. However, the consideration of judges at the level of cassation in applying judex facti and judex juris, is beyond the authority of the Supreme Court in adjudicating criminal cases at the cessation level as stipulated in Article 253 Paragraph (1) of KUHAP, for reasons of cassation that can be justified by the law in the case A criminal offense is an error in the application of law and a legal proceeding at the lower level, not in the examination of evidence and in the assessment of facts]]>
