Application of Elements of Article 112 Paragraph (1) of Law Number 35 of 2009 concerning Narcotics
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.38035/jlph.v5i3.1268Keywords:
Narcotics, Court of Appeal, CrimeAbstract
Narcotics crimes often involve economically unstable individuals who store or distribute drugs as a shortcut to profit. The Ridho Fahmi Nurlete case (Number 108/PID.SUS/2024/PT AMB) shows ambiguity in the application of Article 112 paragraph (1) of Law Number 35 of 2009, which creates uncertainty in proving drug possession and is often considered unfair in distinguishing the role of users or dealers. This study aims to analyze the elements of the crime and the judge's consideration in the verdict. This type of research is legal research. By using the method of Legislative Approach and case approach. And analyzed using juridical qualitative. The results of the study state that the elements of Article 112 paragraph (1) of the Narcotics Law have been fulfilled in the Ridho Fahmi Nurlete case. The element of “every person” was proven through the presence of the defendant, and the element of “without the right to possess narcotics Group I” was proven by the evidence of synthetic narcotics. The judge considered the defendant as a user, not a dealer, because the evidence was less than 1 gram, in accordance with Supreme Court Circular Letter No. 1 of 2017. The sentence of 1 year and 6 months was upheld, with consideration of the defendant's minor role and the applicable legal provisions.
References
Agustono, F., & Yusuf, H. (2024). Analisis Yuridis Penerapan Pasal 112 Ayat 1 Undang-undang 35 Tahun 2009 (Studi Kasus Putusan PN Depok Nomor: 375/PID. SUS/2023/PN. Dpk). COMSERVA: Jurnal Penelitian Dan Pengabdian Masyarakat, 3(11). https://comserva.publikasiindonesia.id/index.php/comserva/article/view/1197
Anindita, T. (2015). Penjatuhan Pidana Di Bawah Batas Ancaman Minimum Khusus Pasal 112 Ayat (1) Undang-Undang Nomor 35 Tahun 2009 Tentang Narkotika Dalam Tindak Pidana Narkotika. Recidive: Jurnal Hukum Pidana Dan Penanggulangan Kejahatan, 4(3), 330–336.
Asropi, S. F. (2020). Analisis Yuridis terhadap Penerapan Hukum Pasal 112 Ayat (1) dan Ayat (2) Undang–Undang Nomor 35 Tahun 2009 Tentang Narkotika Kaitannya dengan Penerapan Hukum Pasal 127 Ayat (1) Huruf A, Ayat (2), dan Ayat (3) Undang–Undang Nomor 35 Tahun 2009 Tentang Narkotika. Mizan: Jurnal Ilmu Hukum, 7(1), 83–98.
Nugroho, B., Sumarso, S., Yustianti, S., & Roesli, M. (2019). Penerapan Pasal 112 Dan Pasal 127 Undang-Undang Nomor 35 Tahun 2009 Tentang Narkotika. Jurnal Media Hukum Dan Peradilan, 5(2), 305–313.
Rambe, N., Syahrin, A., & Mulyadi, M. (2022). Penerapan Pasal 112 Dan Pasal 127 Ayat 1 Huruf A Undang-Undang Nomor 35 Tahun 2009 Tentang Narkotika: Studi Kasus Putusan Pengadilan Negeri Rantau Prapat Nomor 1023/Pid. Sus/2018/PN. RAP; 762/Pid. Sus/2017/PN. Rap; 712/Pid. Sus/2017/PN. Rap. Locus: Jurnal Konsep Ilmu Hukum, 2(4), 176–184.
Yuliandri. (2009). Asas-Asas Pembentukan Peraturan Perundang-Undangan yang Baik. Raja Grafindo Persada.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Leba Max Nandoko Rohi, Tanudjaja
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish their manuscripts in this journal agree to the following conditions:
- The copyright on each article belongs to the author(s).
- The author acknowledges that the Journal of Law, Poliitic and Humanities (JLPH) has the right to be the first to publish with a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license (Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0).
- Authors can submit articles separately, arrange for the non-exclusive distribution of manuscripts that have been published in this journal into other versions (e.g., sent to the author's institutional repository, publication into books, etc.), by acknowledging that the manuscript has been published for the first time in the Journal of Law, Poliitic and Humanities (JLPH).
