<![CDATA[ABSTRAKPutusan Nomor 33/Pid.B/2013/PN.Kdl adalah mengenai kasus perkosaan yang melibatkan korban seorang perempuan tuna rungu berinisial SW. Berdasarkansalinan putusan, SW tidak mendapatkan penerjemah selama proses persidangan. Dari beberapa permasalahan yang ditemui, penelitian ini mengulas tiga rumusanmasalah. Pertama, apakah kerugian dari hasil peradilan yang diterima SW terkait akses atas keadilan? Kedua, bagaimanakah perlakuan yang seharusnya diterapkan bagi korban difabel seperti SW? Ketiga, apa yang harus dilakukan negara untuk menjamin proses peradilan affirmative bagi kaum difabel? Penelitianini menggunakan metode penelitian kualitatif dengan data sekunder dan analisis kualitatif. Hasil penelitian memberikan beberapa kesimpulan. Pertama, tanpaadanya penerjemah atau bahkan pendamping, kerugian berkaitan hak akses atas keadilan yang dialami SW menyebabkan korban tidak bisa memanfaatkan jaminankeuntungan formil dari ketentuan Pasal 98 ayat (1) KUHAP. Kedua, perlakuan khusus dalam proses peradilan yang dibutuhkan difabel adalah proses affirmative. Proses ini bertujuan menghilangkan diskriminasi bagi kaum difabel. Ketiga, dalam merealisasikan jaminan perlakuan affirmative bagi kaum difabel, harus terdapat revisi terhadap peraturan hukum terkait dan penajaman wawasan penegak hukum mengenai isu difabilitas.Kata kunci: aksi afirmatif, diskriminasi hukum, difabel.ABSTRACTCourt Decision Number 33/Pid.B/2013/PN.Kdr is a ruling regarding a rape of a deaf woman initials SW. Based on the copy of the decision, court did not provide SW an interpreter during the trial process. Of the several issues came upon, there are three formulations of the problem in questions reviewed in this analysis. Firstly, regarding access to justice, what are the losses suffered by SW from such trial process? Secondly, how should the legal treatment in judicial process to victims or personswith different ability like SW? Thirdly, what should be through by the state to warrant a judicial affirmative action for the diffable? This study is done with the method of qualitative research using secondary data and qualitative analysis. The study results bring about several conclusions. First, in the absence of an interpreter or an assistant, the loss of the SW’s rights of access to justice has caused her inability to take advantage of the formal justice warranty on the provision of Article 98 Paragraph(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Second, special treatment in the judicial process required by a diffable person is a judicial affirmative action. This action aims to eliminate discrimination for the difables. Third, in the realization of judicial affirmative action for the diffables, there should be revision of the relevant legal regulations and efforts to give insights and understanding to law enforcement authorities on the issue of diffability. Keywords: affirmative action, legal discrimination, diffable.]]>
