Disparitas Ratio Decidendi Hakim terhadap Unsur Menguasai dalam Tindak Pidana Narkotika dengan Pemufakatan Jahat pada Berkas Voeging

Nashihah, Zainah Duratun (2026) Disparitas Ratio Decidendi Hakim terhadap Unsur Menguasai dalam Tindak Pidana Narkotika dengan Pemufakatan Jahat pada Berkas Voeging. Undergraduate thesis, UPN Veteran Jawa Timur.

	Text (Cover) 22071010207.-cover.pdf Download (878kB)
	Text (bab 1) 22071010207 - Bab 1.pdf Download (202kB)
	Text (bab 2) 22071010207.-bab2.pdf.pdf Restricted to Repository staff only until 22 July 2029. Download (101kB)
	Text (bab 3) 22071010207.-bab3.pdf.pdf Restricted to Repository staff only until 22 July 2029. Download (181kB)
	Text (bab 4) 22071010207.-bab4.pdf.pdf Download (15kB)
	Text (daftar pustaka) 22071010207.-daftarpustaka.pdf Download (82kB)
	Text (lampiran) 22071010207.-lampiran.pdf Restricted to Repository staff only until 22 July 2029. Download (917kB)

Abstract

Narcotics crime is categorized as both an extraordinary crime and an intergenerational crime due to its massive and cross-generational impact. One of the most frequently disputed elements of offense under Law Number 35 of 2009 on Narcotics is the element of "controlling" (menguasai) as regulated under Article 112, which often overlaps with Article 114 concerning narcotics distribution. The complexity increases when the involvement of more than one perpetrator is constructed as a criminal conspiracy (pemufakatan jahat) under Article 132 paragraph (1) of the Narcotics Law, particularly in cases examined through the case-file joinder mechanism (voeging) by the Public Prosecutor. This research aims to identify and analyze the concept of criminal conspiracy in narcotics crimes and to analyze the factors causing disparity in judges' ratio decidendi regarding the element of control in narcotics crimes involving criminal conspiracy within joined case files. This research employs a normative legal research method of a descriptive nature, using a Case Approach, a Statute Approach, and a Conceptual Approach. The primary legal materials used include legislation related to narcotics and criminal procedure law, Supreme Court Circular Letters, along with five decisions of the Sidoarjo District Court, namely Decision Number 654/Pid.Sus/2024/PN Sda, Decision Number 509/Pid.Sus/2024/PN Sda, Decision Number 634/Pid.Sus/2024/PN Sda, Decision Number 539/Pid.Sus/2025/PN Sda, and Decision Number 691/Pid.Sus/2025/PN Sda. The results indicate that there is a genuine disparity in judges' ratio decidendi regarding the fulfillment of the element of control, caused by variations in the way judges assess evidence of possession, the individual roles of the defendants, and evidence of intent (scienter), such that some decisions deemed the element of control fulfilled despite facts indicating only minimal possession. Keywords: Disparity, Ratio Decidendi, Element of Control, Criminal Conspiracy, Voeging Case File

Item Type:

Thesis (Undergraduate)

Contributors: