印尼亵渎罪定罪案件的差异

Jakobus Anakletus Rahajaan, Sarifa Niapele
{"title":"印尼亵渎罪定罪案件的差异","authors":"Jakobus Anakletus Rahajaan, Sarifa Niapele","doi":"10.51135/publicpolicy.v3.i2.p141-158","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"          Although freedom about religion has been guaranteed in Pancasila and the 1945 Constitution, in reality problems in society related to religion still occur, such as insults, degrading the beliefs of a group to problems related to the place of worship of a religion. The constitution, which guarantees freedom of expression, is widely abused so that there are unlawful acts, one of which is blasphemy. Judges with free and independent judicial power or the principle of freedom of judges, play an important role in realizing justice for society. However, the disparity of punishment in blasphemy cases has caused controversy about the freedom of judges who are considered not to meet the sense of justice of society. The focus of this study is on the disparity of punishment in blasphemy cases that go viral on social media. This is a descriptive research with a normative legal approach method (normative juridical) carried out by means of a literature study. The data collection tool used in this study is data in the form of document studies and literature tracing. The analytical knife in research is legislation, legal Grand Theory such as evidentiary theory and legal principles such as the principle of Equality before the Law, the Principle of Fair Trial, the principle of freedom of judges, the principle of contante justitie, the principle of justice, certainty and expediency of law and the principle of Nemo Judex Idoneus In Propria Causa. \n          Based on the results of the study, it is understood that the principle of judge freedom is based on a negative evidentiary system, but with their beliefs and freedom, judges in deciding cases are often influenced by the judge's culture, namely the subjectivity of judges and the existence of intervention and intimidation which results in the disparity of punishment in blasphemy cases which is a fairly sensitive issue in Indonesia.","PeriodicalId":146455,"journal":{"name":"PUBLIC POLICY (Jurnal Aplikasi Kebijakan Publik & Bisnis)","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-10-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Disparity of Conviction Cases Blasphemy in Indonesia\",\"authors\":\"Jakobus Anakletus Rahajaan, Sarifa Niapele\",\"doi\":\"10.51135/publicpolicy.v3.i2.p141-158\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"          Although freedom about religion has been guaranteed in Pancasila and the 1945 Constitution, in reality problems in society related to religion still occur, such as insults, degrading the beliefs of a group to problems related to the place of worship of a religion. The constitution, which guarantees freedom of expression, is widely abused so that there are unlawful acts, one of which is blasphemy. Judges with free and independent judicial power or the principle of freedom of judges, play an important role in realizing justice for society. However, the disparity of punishment in blasphemy cases has caused controversy about the freedom of judges who are considered not to meet the sense of justice of society. The focus of this study is on the disparity of punishment in blasphemy cases that go viral on social media. This is a descriptive research with a normative legal approach method (normative juridical) carried out by means of a literature study. The data collection tool used in this study is data in the form of document studies and literature tracing. The analytical knife in research is legislation, legal Grand Theory such as evidentiary theory and legal principles such as the principle of Equality before the Law, the Principle of Fair Trial, the principle of freedom of judges, the principle of contante justitie, the principle of justice, certainty and expediency of law and the principle of Nemo Judex Idoneus In Propria Causa. \\n          Based on the results of the study, it is understood that the principle of judge freedom is based on a negative evidentiary system, but with their beliefs and freedom, judges in deciding cases are often influenced by the judge's culture, namely the subjectivity of judges and the existence of intervention and intimidation which results in the disparity of punishment in blasphemy cases which is a fairly sensitive issue in Indonesia.\",\"PeriodicalId\":146455,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"PUBLIC POLICY (Jurnal Aplikasi Kebijakan Publik & Bisnis)\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-10-06\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"PUBLIC POLICY (Jurnal Aplikasi Kebijakan Publik & Bisnis)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.51135/publicpolicy.v3.i2.p141-158\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"PUBLIC POLICY (Jurnal Aplikasi Kebijakan Publik & Bisnis)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.51135/publicpolicy.v3.i2.p141-158","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

虽然潘卡西拉和1945年宪法保障了宗教自由,但在现实中,与宗教有关的社会问题仍然存在,例如侮辱、贬低一个群体的信仰,以及与宗教礼拜场所有关的问题。保障言论自由的宪法被广泛滥用,出现了亵渎神明等非法行为。法官拥有自由独立的审判权或法官自由原则,在实现社会正义方面发挥着重要作用。但是,在亵渎神明案件中,判罚的差异引起了法官自由的争议,人们认为法官的自由不符合社会的正义感。这项研究的重点是在社交媒体上传播的亵渎案件中惩罚的差异。这是一项描述性研究,采用规范性法律方法(规范性司法),通过文献研究的方式进行。本研究使用的数据收集工具是文献研究和文献追溯形式的数据。研究中的分析之刀是立法、法律大理论(如证据理论)和法律原则(如法律面前人人平等原则、公平审判原则、法官自由原则、内容正义原则、正义原则、法律的确定性和权宜性原则以及“依我而为”原则)。根据研究结果可以了解到,法官自由原则是建立在否定证据制度的基础上的,但由于法官的信仰和自由,法官在判决案件时往往受到法官文化的影响,即法官的主体性和干预恐吓的存在,导致亵渎案件的刑罚差异,这在印度尼西亚是一个相当敏感的问题。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Disparity of Conviction Cases Blasphemy in Indonesia
          Although freedom about religion has been guaranteed in Pancasila and the 1945 Constitution, in reality problems in society related to religion still occur, such as insults, degrading the beliefs of a group to problems related to the place of worship of a religion. The constitution, which guarantees freedom of expression, is widely abused so that there are unlawful acts, one of which is blasphemy. Judges with free and independent judicial power or the principle of freedom of judges, play an important role in realizing justice for society. However, the disparity of punishment in blasphemy cases has caused controversy about the freedom of judges who are considered not to meet the sense of justice of society. The focus of this study is on the disparity of punishment in blasphemy cases that go viral on social media. This is a descriptive research with a normative legal approach method (normative juridical) carried out by means of a literature study. The data collection tool used in this study is data in the form of document studies and literature tracing. The analytical knife in research is legislation, legal Grand Theory such as evidentiary theory and legal principles such as the principle of Equality before the Law, the Principle of Fair Trial, the principle of freedom of judges, the principle of contante justitie, the principle of justice, certainty and expediency of law and the principle of Nemo Judex Idoneus In Propria Causa.           Based on the results of the study, it is understood that the principle of judge freedom is based on a negative evidentiary system, but with their beliefs and freedom, judges in deciding cases are often influenced by the judge's culture, namely the subjectivity of judges and the existence of intervention and intimidation which results in the disparity of punishment in blasphemy cases which is a fairly sensitive issue in Indonesia.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信