Application of Supreme Court Circular Letter by Judges to Narcotics Abuse for Themselves

Abstract

Law enforcement against the abuse of narcotics for oneself in Indonesia still faces various problems, especially related to the application of the Supreme Court circular by judges of first instance and appeals. Based on an analysis of several decisions of Pengadilan Negeri Lubuk Pakam, it was found that the panel of judges at the first level and appeals tended not to make a legal breakthrough to get out of the Public Prosecutor's indictment which applied Pasal 112 ayat (1) Undang-Undang Nomor 35 Tahun 2009 concerning Narcotics. In fact, the facts revealed at the trial show that there is a logical and systematic legal basis for applying Pasal 127 ayat (1). In contrast to the cassation judge who is careful and dares to make decisions by considering legal facts and applying SEMA Number 4 of 2010 and SEMA Number 3 of 2015 as a basis for imposing a prison sentence below a special minimum. This study uses a qualitative descriptive method with a normative juridical approach that examines court decisions and relevant laws and regulations. The results of the study show that judges at the cassation level have applied restorative justice appropriately in accordance with the mandate of Pasal 5 ayat (1) Undang-Undang Nomor 48 Tahun 2009 concerning Judicial Power which requires judges to explore and understand the value of justice that lives in society. This is an important example for the courts of first instance to be more progressive in upholding substantive justice.