Article Per Year (5 Year)
p-Index From 2021 - 2026
0.23
P-Index
This Author published in this journals
All Journal Multidiciplinary Output Research for Actual and International Issue (Morfai Journal)
Belovit Eva Lubis
Unknown Affiliation
Religion Agriculture, Biological Sciences & Forestry Arts Humanities Chemical Engineering, Chemistry & Bioengineering Civil Engineering, Building, Construction & Architecture Computer Science & IT Decision Sciences, Operations Research & Management Economics, Econometrics & Finance Education Energy Engineering Environmental Science Health Professions Languange, Linguistic, Communication & Media Law, Crime, Criminology & Criminal Justice Library & Information Science Materials Science & Nanotechnology Social Sciences Other

Published : 1 Documents Claim Missing Document
Claim Missing Document
Check
Articles

Found 1 Documents
Search

 1 
LEGAL ANALYSIS OF LEGAL PROTECTION FOR VICTIMS OF THE CRIMINAL ACTS OF EMBAGARY OF TWO-WHEEL VEHICLES (STUDY OF DECISION NUMBER 858/PID.B/2025/PN.LBP) Belovit Eva Lubis; Hisar Siregar; Samuel Situmorang
Multidiciplinary Output Research For Actual and International Issue (MORFAI) Vol. 6 No. 3 (2026): Multidiciplinary Output Research For Actual and International Issue
Publisher : RADJA PUBLIKA

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar

Abstract

This study examines legal protection for victims of motorcycle imbezzlement and a critical analysis of the judge's considerations in Decision Number 858/Pid.B/2025/PN.LBP using a normative juridical method with statutory, case, and conceptual approaches. Defendant Muklis Pranoto was proven to have embezzled the victim's motorcycle by pawning it for Rp. 500,000 from a value of Rp. 7,000,000 for online gambling, and was sentenced to 2 years in prison under Article 372 of the old Criminal Code (Article 486 of the National Criminal Code). The judge's selection of Article 372 was dogmatically correct, as criminal intent arose only after legal possession of the vehicle, rendering Article 378 inapplicable. However, serious gaps in victim protection were identified: the prosecutor did not seek restitution, the seeking mechanism (Articles 98–101 of the Criminal Procedure Code) was not pursued, and the judge did not order residual restitution of Rp. 6,500,000. Restorative justice evaluation reveals the verdict only partially fulfills restorative elements, lacking formal dialogue, full restitution, and LPSK involvement. Systemic reform in the implementation of Law No. 31 of 2014 and Supreme Court Regulation No. 1 of 2022 is urgently needed.
Co-Authors Hisar Siregar Samuel Situmorang