{"title":"“CULPA在刑事案件中的概念”是对18号判决/Pid的比较","authors":"Ernest Sengi","doi":"10.24912/erahukum.v17i2.5993","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The concept of omission or culpa from the legal aspect is very different from the concept of omission or culpa that is understood everyday. Many events include omission or culpa but the incident may not be a criminal act. Thus, law enforcement must be careful in giving meaning to a legal act related to omission. Court Decision Number 18 / Pid.B / 2017 / PN.TOb. is a decision which is the object of research in this paper, in which the author disagrees about the concept of omission or culpa which is considered by the Tobelo District Court judge in that decision, although I agrees that the defendant's actions were omission. The analysis used is legal analysis using a statute approach and case approach so that it can find out the basis of the court's consideration of choosing Pasal 359 KUHP dropped against the defendant Imsal Ilahi Baksi. In its consideration, it was found that Tobelo District Court judges interpreted omission as \" not careful \" or \" lack of attention\" so that the defendant was proven legally and convincingly committed a crime of omission. Meanwhile, in the criminal law doctrine, many concepts of omission or culpa are not always interpreted as \"not careful\" or \"lack of attention\" such as omission in the sense of onbewuste schuld. Because of the fact, in this case the defendant was careful and gave attention by notifying his actions (installing electricity), but only did not imagine the possibility of consequences","PeriodicalId":241921,"journal":{"name":"Era Hukum - Jurnal Ilmiah Ilmu Hukum","volume":"8 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-10-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"KONSEP CULPA DALAM PERKARA PIDANA SUATU ANALISIS PERBANDINGAN PUTUSAN NOMOR 18/Pid.B/2017/PN.TOBELO\",\"authors\":\"Ernest Sengi\",\"doi\":\"10.24912/erahukum.v17i2.5993\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The concept of omission or culpa from the legal aspect is very different from the concept of omission or culpa that is understood everyday. Many events include omission or culpa but the incident may not be a criminal act. Thus, law enforcement must be careful in giving meaning to a legal act related to omission. Court Decision Number 18 / Pid.B / 2017 / PN.TOb. is a decision which is the object of research in this paper, in which the author disagrees about the concept of omission or culpa which is considered by the Tobelo District Court judge in that decision, although I agrees that the defendant's actions were omission. The analysis used is legal analysis using a statute approach and case approach so that it can find out the basis of the court's consideration of choosing Pasal 359 KUHP dropped against the defendant Imsal Ilahi Baksi. In its consideration, it was found that Tobelo District Court judges interpreted omission as \\\" not careful \\\" or \\\" lack of attention\\\" so that the defendant was proven legally and convincingly committed a crime of omission. Meanwhile, in the criminal law doctrine, many concepts of omission or culpa are not always interpreted as \\\"not careful\\\" or \\\"lack of attention\\\" such as omission in the sense of onbewuste schuld. Because of the fact, in this case the defendant was careful and gave attention by notifying his actions (installing electricity), but only did not imagine the possibility of consequences\",\"PeriodicalId\":241921,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Era Hukum - Jurnal Ilmiah Ilmu Hukum\",\"volume\":\"8 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-10-10\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"3\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Era Hukum - Jurnal Ilmiah Ilmu Hukum\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.24912/erahukum.v17i2.5993\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Era Hukum - Jurnal Ilmiah Ilmu Hukum","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.24912/erahukum.v17i2.5993","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3
摘要
法律上的不作为或过失的概念与日常理解的不作为或过失的概念有很大的不同。许多事件包括疏忽或过失,但事件可能不是犯罪行为。因此,执法人员必须谨慎地赋予与不作为有关的法律行为以意义。法院判决第18号/ Pid。B / 2017 / PN.TOb。是本文研究的对象,其中笔者对托贝洛地区法院法官在该判决中所考虑的不作为或过失的概念持不同意见,尽管笔者同意被告的行为是不作为。所使用的分析是使用法规方法和案例方法的法律分析,以便找出法院考虑选择对被告Imsal Ilahi Baksi提出的Pasal 359的依据。在审议过程中发现,托贝洛地区法院的法官将不作为解释为“不小心”或“不注意”,以便在法律上令人信服地证明被告犯了不作为罪。同时,在刑法学说中,许多不作为或过失的概念并不总是被解释为“不小心”或“不注意”,如不作为的意义上的不作为。由于这个事实,在这个案例中,被告是谨慎的,并且注意到他的行为(安装电力),但只是没有想象到后果的可能性
KONSEP CULPA DALAM PERKARA PIDANA SUATU ANALISIS PERBANDINGAN PUTUSAN NOMOR 18/Pid.B/2017/PN.TOBELO
The concept of omission or culpa from the legal aspect is very different from the concept of omission or culpa that is understood everyday. Many events include omission or culpa but the incident may not be a criminal act. Thus, law enforcement must be careful in giving meaning to a legal act related to omission. Court Decision Number 18 / Pid.B / 2017 / PN.TOb. is a decision which is the object of research in this paper, in which the author disagrees about the concept of omission or culpa which is considered by the Tobelo District Court judge in that decision, although I agrees that the defendant's actions were omission. The analysis used is legal analysis using a statute approach and case approach so that it can find out the basis of the court's consideration of choosing Pasal 359 KUHP dropped against the defendant Imsal Ilahi Baksi. In its consideration, it was found that Tobelo District Court judges interpreted omission as " not careful " or " lack of attention" so that the defendant was proven legally and convincingly committed a crime of omission. Meanwhile, in the criminal law doctrine, many concepts of omission or culpa are not always interpreted as "not careful" or "lack of attention" such as omission in the sense of onbewuste schuld. Because of the fact, in this case the defendant was careful and gave attention by notifying his actions (installing electricity), but only did not imagine the possibility of consequences