Analysis of Disparity in Judges' Decisions in Narcotics Crimes Cases: Case Study of the Decision of the Sungailiat District Court Number 175/PID. SUS/2017/PN SGL JO Supreme Court Decision Number 629 PK/PID. SUS/2024

Authors

  • Selvy University of Pertiba
  • Yandi University of Pertiba

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.38035/jlph.v5i4.1512

Keywords:

Disparity, Narcotics Crime, Judicial Decision, Legal Certainty, Criminal Justice System

Abstract

The disparity in judges' decisions regarding narcotics cases in Indonesia has become a critical issue, affecting legal certainty and public trust in the judicial system. This study examines the decision disparity in the Sungailiat District Court Case No. 175/Pid.Sus/2017/PN Sgl and Supreme Court Case No. 629 PK/Pid.Sus/2024. Using a normative and empirical juridical approach, the study identifies key factors influencing decision differences, including variations in judicial interpretation, application of legal provisions, and consideration of mitigating/aggravating circumstances. By employing Gustav Radbruch's theory of justice and Muladi's integrative criminal theory, the analysis highlights the tension between legal certainty, justice, and societal interests. The findings suggest that disparities arise due to judicial discretion, evidentiary differences, and systemic legal inconsistencies. The research underscores the need for more standardized sentencing guidelines to minimize inconsistencies and enhance fairness in narcotics-related verdicts. The study’s implications contribute to the discourse on judicial transparency, criminal law reform, and the need for a more balanced approach between punishment and rehabilitation in Indonesia’s legal system

References

(n.d.).

Abdurrachman, H., Praptono, E., & Rizkianto, K. (2012). Disparity of Judges' Decisions in Drug Cases. 7.

Budiawan, S. V., Mulyadi, M., & Yunara, E. (n.d.). JURIDICAL ANALYSIS OF CRIMINAL DISPARITY AGAINST THE COURT DECISION OF NARCOTICS ABUSERS IN RELATION TO EVIDENCE EXCEEDING ABUSERS.

Khairunisa, K., & Ravena, D. (2021). Analysis of Obstacles to the Implementation of the Death Penalty Execution on Perpetrators of Narcotics Trafficking in Correctional Institutions is linked to the Constitutional Court Decision Number 107/PUU-XIII/2015. Journal of Legal Research, 1(1), 15–20. https://doi.org/10.29313/jrih.v1i1.59

Santoso, A. P. (2020). DISPARITY OF VERDICTS IN NARCOTICS CASES IN THE SOUTH JAKARTA DISTRICT COURT (Case Study Case No. 221/PIDSUS/2018/PN. JKT. CELL. With Case No. 266/PIDSUS/2018/PN. JKT. SEL.). Vol., 221.

Suhariyanto, B. (2015). LEGAL ASPECTS OF REVIEW MORE THAN ONCE IN CRIMINAL CASES (PERSPECTIVE OF ENFORCEMENT OF JUSTICE, CERTAINTY AND USEFULNESS OF LAW). Journal of Law and Justice, 4(2), 335. https://doi.org/10.25216/jhp.4.2.2015.335-350

Downloads

Published

2025-04-29

How to Cite

Selvy, S., & Yandi, Y. (2025). Analysis of Disparity in Judges’ Decisions in Narcotics Crimes Cases: Case Study of the Decision of the Sungailiat District Court Number 175/PID. SUS/2017/PN SGL JO Supreme Court Decision Number 629 PK/PID. SUS/2024. Journal of Law, Politic and Humanities, 5(4), 2991–2995. https://doi.org/10.38035/jlph.v5i4.1512

Issue

Vol. 5 No. 4 (2025): (JLPH) Journal of Law, Politic and Humanities

Section

Articles

License

Copyright (c) 2025 Selvy, Syafri Hariansah

Creative Commons License

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:

  1. The copyright on each article belongs to the author(s).
  2. 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).
  3. 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).