<![CDATA[Abstract This research is motivated by the inconsistency between the facts revealed in court and the judicial decision in the case of assault resulting in death in Decision Number 454/Pid.B/2024/PN Sby. The main issue addressed is the juridical analysis of the judge"™s consideration in this case, the application of judge"™s consideration theory and the negative proof theory, as well as the conformity of the decision with Article 50 of Law No. 48 of 2009 on Judicial Power. The purpose of this research is to comprehensively describe the judge"™s consideration from juridical aspects, trial facts, and relevant legal theories. This study is based on the theory of judge"™s consideration proposed by Lilik Mulyadi and the negative proof theory as regulated in Article 183 of the Indonesian Criminal Procedure Code (KUHAP). The research method used is normative legal research with a qualitative approach, descriptive-analytical in nature, using secondary data such as legislation, doctrine, jurisprudence, and legal literature. Data collection was carried out through library research, and the data were analyzed qualitatively. The results show that the judge"™s considerations in the a quo decision did not meet the ideal standards of judicial reasoning, as they failed to comprehensively analyze the subsidiary indictment under Article 351 paragraph (3) of the Indonesian Criminal Code (KUHP). This study concludes that judges should be more thorough in considering juridical aspects, trial facts, doctrine, and proof theories. It is suggested that criminal procedure law reform and the improvement of judicial decision-making quality are necessary to better fulfill the sense of justice in society. Keywords: Judicial Consideration, Negative Proof Theory, Article 351 KUHP, Article 50 Judicial Power Law Abstrak Penelitian ini dilatarbelakangi oleh adanya ketidaksesuaian antara fakta persidangan dengan putusan hakim dalam perkara penganiayaan yang menyebabkan kematian pada Putusan Nomor 454/Pid.B/2024/PN Sby. Permasalahan pokok yang diangkat adalah bagaimana analisis yuridis terhadap pertimbangan hakim dalam perkara tersebut, bagaimana penerapan teori pertimbangan hakim dan teori pembuktian negatif, serta bagaimana kesesuaian putusan dengan Pasal 50 UU No. 48 Tahun 2009 tentang Kekuasaan Kehakiman. Tujuan penelitian ini adalah untuk menguraikan secara mendalam pertimbangan hakim, baik dari aspek yuridis, fakta persidangan, maupun teori hukum yang relevan. Penelitian ini menggunakan landasan teori pertimbangan hakim menurut Lilik Mulyadi serta teori pembuktian negatif yang diatur dalam Pasal 183 KUHAP. Metode penelitian yang dipakai adalah penelitian hukum normatif dengan pendekatan kualitatif, bersifat deskriptif-analitis, menggunakan data sekunder berupa peraturan perundang-undangan, doktrin, yurisprudensi, serta literatur hukum. Pengumpulan data dilakukan melalui studi kepustakaan, dan hasilnya dianalisis secara kualitatif. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa pertimbangan hakim dalam putusan a quo belum memenuhi standar pertimbangan hukum yang ideal, karena tidak menguraikan secara komprehensif dakwaan subsidiair Pasal 351 ayat (3) KUHP. Kesimpulan penelitian ini menegaskan perlunya hakim lebih cermat menimbang aspek yuridis, fakta, doktrin, dan teori hukum pembuktian. Saran yang diajukan adalah perlunya pembaruan hukum acara pidana serta peningkatan kualitas putusan hakim agar lebih memenuhi rasa keadilan masyarakat. Kata Kunci: Pertimbangan Hakim, Pembuktian Negatif, Tindak Pidana Penganiayaan, Pasal 50 UU Kekuasaaan Kehakiman.]]>
