Article Per Year (5 Year)
p-Index From 2021 - 2026
0.562
P-Index
This Author published in this journals
All Journal Jurnal Penegakan Hukum dan Keadilan Ahmad Dahlan Legal Perspective
Arkanbariq, Anantya Aliyya
Unknown Affiliation
Law, Crime, Criminology & Criminal Justice

Published : 3 Documents Claim Missing Document
Claim Missing Document
Check
Articles

Found 3 Documents
Search

 1 
Disparity in Sentencing in Premeditated Murder Crimes to Provide Justice in Indonesia Gulo, Cornelius Dikae Zolohefona; Fahrurrozi, Fahrurrozi; Aviva, Faradistia Nur; Arkanbariq, Anantya Aliyya
Jurnal Penegakan Hukum dan Keadilan Vol 5, No 2 (2024): September
Publisher : Universitas Muhammadiyah Yogyakarta

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.18196/jphk.v5i2.21629

Abstract

Sentencing disparity is the imposition of different punishments for similar criminal acts without justification. Disparity of punishment is also found in several judges' decisions regarding premeditated murder, for example, Cassation Decision No. 1727 K/PID/2009 and Cassation Decision No. 922 K/Pid/2018. The two verdicts, in principle, addressed the case of premeditated murder; however, they rendered disparate and quite lame sentences for each defendant. This study aims to examine the punishments associated with criminal offenses and the factors causing the disparities in sentencing for premeditated murder in Indonesia. This study constitutes doctrinal legal research that examines secondary data, specifically judicial verdicts and legal statutes about premeditated murder. This study revealed that criminal sanctions were initially designed to inflict suffering on perpetrators who committed crimes. Ultimately, the objective of the sanctions evolved into a mechanism for educating perpetrators to prevent the recurrence of their actions. This study identified factors that cause disparities in sentencing for premeditated murder in Indonesia, precisely the defendant's type of culpability, motives and intentions behind the crime, intrinsic characteristics of the defendant, how the defendant executed the criminal act, and the potential impact of the sentence on the defendant's future. These factors can become sentencing guidelines that can serve as a guide and control for judges in formulating and imposing sentencing verdicts so that the sentencing can provide justice for all parties, both for victims, defendants, and the wider community.
Antinomy of Multiple Interpretations of Very Urgent Reason in The Marriage Dispensation in Indonesia Arkanbariq, Anantya Aliyya
Ahmad Dahlan Legal Perspective Vol. 4 No. 1 (2024)
Publisher : Universitas Ahmad Dahlan

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.12928/adlp.v4i1.9379

Abstract

The purpose of this research is to analyze the purpose of marriage dispensation in Indonesia and the antinomy of multiple interpretations of very urgent reasons in the regulation of marriage dispensation in Indonesia. This research is an empirical normative research that focuses on examining the antinomy in the regulation of marriage dispensation in Indonesia based on primary and secondary data that has been determined. This research use conceptual approach, statutory approach, and case approach with descriptive-qualitative method. The research found that the reason for the existence of marriage dispensation in the Indonesian marriage legal framework is to provide a way out for couples who are forced to marry before the age of 19 due to urgent reasons. The research also found that there are at least two antinomies as result of the lack of clear parameters and guidelines for judges regarding the reasons for urgency, namely between legal certainty and justice and between expediency and judge objectivity. To suppress the existence of antinomies that are too extreme, at least the government must regulate several things as parameters and guidelines that limit judges in interpreting very urgent reasons, including certain circumstances that absolutely cannot be granted dispensation, the minimum age limit for granting marriage dispensation for marriages where no previous pregnancy has occurred, and judges must ensure that the prospective bride and groom are underage to understand the rights, obligations, and risks of being husband and wife. Therefore, this research contributes to the development of science, especially in the field of law, by discovering the existence of antinomy as a result of the broad authority of judges in interpreting the reasons that are very urgent in the regulation of marriage dispensation in Indonesia and providing solutions to overcome the antinomy that is too extreme on these issues.
Disparity in Sentencing in Premeditated Murder Crimes to Provide Justice in Indonesia Gulo, Cornelius Dikae Zolohefona; Fahrurrozi, Fahrurrozi; Aviva, Faradistia Nur; Arkanbariq, Anantya Aliyya
Jurnal Penegakan Hukum dan Keadilan Vol. 5 No. 2 (2024): September
Publisher : Universitas Muhammadiyah Yogyakarta

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.18196/jphk.v5i2.21629

Abstract

Sentencing disparity is the imposition of different punishments for similar criminal acts without justification. Disparity of punishment is also found in several judges' decisions regarding premeditated murder, for example, Cassation Decision No. 1727 K/PID/2009 and Cassation Decision No. 922 K/Pid/2018. The two verdicts, in principle, addressed the case of premeditated murder; however, they rendered disparate and quite lame sentences for each defendant. This study aims to examine the punishments associated with criminal offenses and the factors causing the disparities in sentencing for premeditated murder in Indonesia. This study constitutes doctrinal legal research that examines secondary data, specifically judicial verdicts and legal statutes about premeditated murder. This study revealed that criminal sanctions were initially designed to inflict suffering on perpetrators who committed crimes. Ultimately, the objective of the sanctions evolved into a mechanism for educating perpetrators to prevent the recurrence of their actions. This study identified factors that cause disparities in sentencing for premeditated murder in Indonesia, precisely the defendant's type of culpability, motives and intentions behind the crime, intrinsic characteristics of the defendant, how the defendant executed the criminal act, and the potential impact of the sentence on the defendant's future. These factors can become sentencing guidelines that can serve as a guide and control for judges in formulating and imposing sentencing verdicts so that the sentencing can provide justice for all parties, both for victims, defendants, and the wider community.
Co-Authors Aviva, Faradistia Nur Gulo, Cornelius Dikae Zolohefona Hery Widijanto