Implikasi Pembatalan Batasan Waktu Pengajuan Grasi  Pasca Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi

Ade Azharie; Rio Christiawan; Tuti Widyaningrum

doi:10.31328/wy.v8i1.5928

Authors

Ade Azharie Universitas 17 Agustus 1945
Rio Christiawan Universitas 17 Agustus 1945
Tuti Widyaningrum Universitas 17 Agustus 1945

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.31328/wy.v8i1.5928

Keywords:

Grasi, Eksekusi, Kepastian Hukum., Pardon, Execution, Legal Certainty

Abstract

Provisions regarding applications for clemency were previously regulated in Law No. 5 of 2010, then annulled by the Constitutional Court and returned to the norm, which does not provide a time limit for applications for clemency. As a result, for death row inmates, the implementation of court decisions or executions must wait for the convict's request for clemency. The problem that will be studied in this paper is whether the Constitutional Court's decision has implications for hampering law enforcement at the execution stage and resulting in disruption of the element of legal certainty. The research was conducted using a normative juridical research approach with secondary data, which was obtained from library research. If data analysis is described in the form of sentence descriptions and analyzed qualitatively, then a conclusion will be drawn. Based on the research results, it is known that the implication in the execution stage that arises is that there are endless attempts to delay execution, giving rise to uncertainty. The prosecutor, as the executor, experienced difficulties in carrying out the execution of the convict. This delay reduces the deterrent effect on law enforcement. Legal certainty must still be part of the objectives of the law, not just paying attention to justice and benefit alone. Thus, it is still necessary to calculate a reasonable time regarding the deadline for executing the death penalty, especially when the convict or his heirs do not submit a request for clemency.

References

Asshiddiqie, Jimly. Konstitusi Dan Konstitusionalisme Di Indonesia. Cet. Ke-2. Jakarta: Sinar Grafika, 2021. https://books.google.co.id/books?hl=en&lr=&id=QXtWEAAAQBAJ&oi=fnd&pg=PP1&dq=bentuk+negara+jimly&ots=UMK7gOMvxy&sig=1w_h6F1IFuzDdSodvCTgcMsud8U&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=bentuk negara jimly&f=false.

Abdul Kadir Muhammad. (2004). Hukum dan Penelitian Hukum. Bandung: Citra Aditya Bakti.

Dhian Deliani. (2011). Pelaksanaan Kekuasaan Presiden dalam Pemberian Grasi: Studi terhadap Pelaksanaan Pemberian Grasi oleh Presiden Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono Tahun 2004 s/d 2010. Jakarta: Universitas Indonesia.

E. Fernando M. Manullang. (2022). Misinterpretasi Ide Gustav Radbruch mengenai Doktrin Filosofis tentang Validitas dalam Pembentukan Undang-undang. Undang: Jurnal Hukum, 5 (2). https://doi.org/10.22437/ujh.5.2.453-480.

Endang Pratiwi, dkk. (2022). Teori Utilitarianisme Jeremy Bentham: Tujuan Hukum atau Metode Pengujian Produk Hukum? Jurnal Konstitusi 19 (2). https://doi.org/10.31078/jk1922.

Haeruman Jayadi, dkk. (2022). Lembaga-Lembaga Negara Sederajat Dalam Struktur Kelembagaan Negara Berdasarkan Undang-undang Dasar 1945. Jurnal Kompilasi Hukum 7 (2).

Iftitah, Anik, ed. HUKUM TATA NEGARA. Sada Kurnia Pustaka, 2023. https://books.google.com/books?hl=id&lr=&id=4LTSEAAAQBAJ&oi=fnd&pg=PA1&ots=Z53SXQeJx_&sig=kO9QBc7siSbkWjusxRIOXYSsCoM.

â€”â€”â€”, ed. Ilmu Perundang-Undangan. Juli 2023. Sada Kurnia Pustaka, 2023.

J.C.T Simorangkir. (2004). Kamus Hukum. Jakarta: Sinar Grafika

J.E. Sahetapy. (2007). Pidana Mati Dalam Negara Pancasila. Bandung: Citra Aditya Bakti.

Jaâ€™far Baehaqi. (2016). Paradoks Penegakan Hukum Mahkamah Konstitusi Dalam Judicial Review. Fakultas Syariah dan Hukum UIN Walisongo.

Jimly Asshiddiqie. (2006). Konstitusi dan Konstitusionalisme Indonesia. Jakarta: Konstitusi Press.

Kania Khairunisa dan Dey Ravena. (202). Analisis Hambatan Pelaksanaan Eksekusi Pidana Mati pada Pelaku Tindak Pidana Pengedaran Narkotika di Dalam Lembaga Pemasyarakatan Dihubungkan dengan Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor 107/PUU-XIII/2015. Prosiding Ilmu Hukum 6 (1).

Leden Marpaung. (2006). Asas-Teori-Praktik Hukum Pidana. Jakarta: Sinar Grafika.

Niâ€™matul Huda. (2004). Politik Ketatanegaraan Indonesia Kajian terhadap Dinamika Perubahan UUD NRI 1945. Yogyakarta: FH UII Press.

Noerwahid Hidayat. (1994). Pidana Mati Dalam Hukum Pidana Islam. Surabaya: Al Ikhlas.

Oemar Seno Adji. (1980). Peradilan Bebas Negara Hukum. Jakarta: Erlangga.

Ombudsman R.I. (2017). Kelalaian dan Perbedaan Perlakuan yang dilakukan oleh instansi Kejaksaan Agung dan Mahkamah Agung terhadap Humprey Ejike Jefferson Tergolong Tindakan Maladministrasi. Diakses dari https://www.ombudsman.go.id/news/r/kelalaian-dan-perbedaan-perlakuan-yang-dilakukan-oleh-instansi-kejaksaan-agung-dan-mahkamah-agung-terhadap-humprey-ejike-jefferson-tergolong-tindakan-maladministrasi.

Ronny Hanitijo Soemitro. (1990). Metodologi Penelitian Hukum dan Jurimetri. Jakarta: Ghalia.

Ruhijat, Tubagus Rismunandar. Memperkuat Peradaban Hukum Dan Ketatanegaraan Indonesia. Sekretariat Jenderal Komisi Yudisial Republik Indonesia, 2019. https://komisiyudisial.go.id/frontend/publication_download/61.

Satjipto Rahardjo. (2012). Ilmu Hukum. Bandung: Citra Aditya Bakti.

Soejono dan H. Abdurrahman. (2003). Metode Penelitian Hukum. Jakarta: Rineka Cipta.

Zainuddin Ali. (2013). Metode Penelitian Hukum. Jakarta: Sinar Grafika.

Staatsblad 1933 No. 22.

Osamu/Sei/Hi/No. 1583

Undang-undang Dasar Negara Republik Indonesia Tahun 1945

Undang-undang Nomor 3 Tahun 1950 tentang Permohonan Grasi

Undang-undang Nomor 22 Tahun 2002 tentang Grasi

Undang-undang Nomor 5 Tahun 2010 tentang Perubahan atas Undang-undang Nomor 22 Tahun 2002 tentang Grasi

Putusan Mahkamah Agung Nomor PUT/34-K/MIL/2006 Pid/2010 tanggal 07 Juli 2006

Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor 107/PUU-XIII/2015 tanggal 15 Juni 2016