Electronic Theses and Dissertation

Pertimbangan hakim (ratio decidendi) merupakan unsur yang sangat menentukan keadilan substantif bagi para pihak, terutama korban, karena hakim dituntut untuk menilai perbuatan terdakwa secara utuh dan proporsional, bukan sekadar mencocokkan fakta dengan rumusan norma secara tekstual. Persoalan ini tampak nyata dalam Putusan Mahkamah Syar'iyah Banda Aceh Nomor 53/JN/2021/MS.Bna.

Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk menjelaskan pertimbangan hakim Mahkamah Syar'iyah Banda Aceh dalam Putusan Nomor 53/JN/2021/MS.Bna yang belum tepat dilihat pada perbuatan terdakwa, serta untuk menjelaskan mengapa putusan tersebut belum memenuhi rasa kemanfaatan, rasa keadilan, dan kepastian hukum bagi korban.

Penelitian ini merupakan penelitian hukum normatif (normative legal research) dengan menggunakan pendekatan perundang-undangan (statute approach), pendekatan kasus (case approach), dan pendekatan konseptual (conceptual approach).

Hasil penelitian menunjukkan dua temuan utama. Pertama, pertimbangan hakim belum tepat dalam menilai perbuatan terdakwa, karena Majelis Hakim hanya menilai apakah unsur tekstual jarimah pemerkosaan telah terpenuhi secara sempurna, tanpa mempertimbangkan rangkaian perbuatan terdakwa secara utuh yaitu kesengajaan dan perencanaan yang sistematis, akibat fisik dan psikologis yang serius, serta tidak adanya alasan yang meringankan karena terdakwa berhenti bukan atas kehendaknya sendiri melainkan karena faktor eksternal. Ketiadaan penilaian yang utuh dan proporsional ini menghasilkan sanksi uqubat penjara 60 bulan berdasarkan Pasal 47 Qanun Jinayat, yang terkesan tidak sebanding dengan keseriusan perbuatan terdakwa. Kedua, putusan tersebut belum memenuhi rasa kemanfaatan, keadilan, dan kepastian hukum bagi korban, karena sanksi yang dijatuhkan tidak proporsional dengan kerugian fisik permanen dan kerugian psikologis riil yang diderita korban, amar putusan sama sekali tidak memuat pertimbangan mengenai pemulihan korban, dan ketidaktepatan pertimbangan hakim tersebut menimbulkan viktimisasi sekunder yang bertentangan dengan prinsip the best interest of the child serta berpotensi melemahkan perlindungan hukum bagi korban kekerasan seksual anak di Aceh.

Diharapkan kepada para penegak hukum agar dalam memutus perkara jarimah kekerasan seksual terhadap anak senantiasa menilai perbuatan terdakwa secara utuh dan proporsional mencakup rangkaian tindakan, akibat yang ditimbulkan, dan kondisi korban sebagai anak serta secara eksplisit memuat pertimbangan mengenai pemenuhan rasa kemanfaatan, keadilan, dan kepastian hukum bagi korban dalam setiap putusan, bukan sekadar mencocokkan fakta dengan rumusan tekstual suatu jarimah.

The judicial reasoning (ratio decidendi) constitutes a crucial element in ensuring substantive justice for the parties, particularly the victim, as judges are required to assess the defendant's conduct comprehensively and proportionately rather than merely matching the facts to the textual formulation of a legal provision. This issue is clearly reflected in the Decision of the Mahkamah Syar'iyah Banda Aceh Number 53/JN/2021/MS.Bna. This study aims to examine the judicial considerations adopted by the Mahkamah Syar'iyah Banda Aceh in Decision Number 53/JN/2021/MS.Bna, which are considered inappropriate in assessing the defendant's conduct, and to explain why the decision failed to satisfy the principles of expediency, justice, and legal certainty from the victim's perspective. This research employs a normative legal research method using a statutory approach (statute approach), a case approach (case approach), and a conceptual approach (conceptual approach). The findings of this study reveal two principal conclusions. First, the judges' considerations were inappropriate in evaluating the defendant's conduct because the Panel of Judges merely assessed whether the textual elements of the jarimah of rape had been fully satisfied without considering the defendant's entire course of conduct, including the deliberate and systematic nature of the acts, the severe physical and psychological consequences suffered by the victim, and the absence of any mitigating circumstances, given that the defendant ceased the conduct not of his own volition but due to external factors. This failure to conduct a comprehensive and proportionate assessment resulted in the imposition of a 60-month term of uqubat imprisonment pursuant to Article 47 of the Qanun Jinayat, a sanction that appears disproportionate to the seriousness of the defendant's conduct. Second, the decision failed to satisfy the principles of expediency, justice, and legal certainty for the victim because the sanction imposed was not proportionate to the permanent physical injuries and actual psychological harm suffered by the victim. Furthermore, the operative part of the judgment did not contain any consideration regarding the victim's recovery, and the inadequacy of the judges' reasoning resulted in secondary victimization, which is inconsistent with the principle of the best interest of the child and may potentially undermine the legal protection afforded to child victims of sexual violence in Aceh. Therefore, it is recommended that law enforcement authorities, when adjudicating cases involving the jarimah of sexual violence against children, consistently assess the defendant's conduct comprehensively and proportionately by considering the entire course of conduct, the resulting consequences, and the victim's status as a child. Moreover, judicial decisions should explicitly address the principles of expediency, justice, and legal certainty for victims rather th