Disparitas Pidana Dalam Kasus Tindak Pidana Pencucian Uang Hasil Tindak Pidana Narkotika

Abstract

Criminal sanctions aim to give preferential suffering to the offender so that he felt as a
result of his actions. In addition aimed at imposing suffering against the perpetrators,
criminal sanctions also constitute a statement of disapproval against offenders act. In the case
of money laundering narcotics proceeds of crime, criminal sanctions is necessary as a
deterrent effect imposed by the judge to the perpetrators of money laundering narcotics
proceeds of crime. But often found differences in criminal sanctions against the judge
imposed the same case, or better known as the Criminal Disparities resulting in the
emergence of injustice. Criminal is a criminal disparity unequal application of the same
criminal acts without apparent justification. This study examines the problems of (1) How is
the construction of thinking judges in decisions in the case of money laundering narcotics
proceeds of crime in the case Number: 593 / PID / SUS / 2012 / PN.PBR and case Number:
258 / PID / SUS / 2014 /PN.PBR? (2) Are the causes of dispartitas verdict against money
laundering narcotics proceeds of crime. The goal in this study to determine construction think
judges in imposing criminal verdict in the case Number: 593 / PID / SUS / 2012 / PN.PBR
and case Number: 258 / PID / SUS / 2014 / PN.PBR? and also to determine the factors that
cause disparities verdict against money laundering narcotics proceeds of crime. From the
results of this study concluded (1) that in case Number: 593 / PID / SUS / 2012 / PN.PBR
defendant is proven guilty of money laundering as stipulated in Law No. 8 of 2010 with
sentenced to imprisonment for 3 (three) years and a fine Rp.800.000.000, - (eight hundred
million dollars) and in case Number: 258 / PID / SUS / 2014 / PN.PBR defendant was legally
commit money laundering continues, the defendant shall be sentenced to prison for 1 ( one)
year 2 (two) months and a fine of Rp. 100.000.000, - (one hundred million rupiah). (2) The
cause of the disparity verdict against the same criminal act caused by the law itself factors,
factors resources law enforcement officials, a factor of self-judge itself (both internal and
external) and also the factors of the situation inside the defendant. This study suggested that
the government mengandemen Law on Money Laundering which so no criminal
classification is based on the type of predicate offenses, the amount of money obtained from
the predicate offense, and specifically for money laundering predicate crime that his narcotic
crime to establish regulations for the amount and type of drugs so that the judge in making
the interpretation of the statute can be limited.
Keywords: Disparity, Criminal, Money Laundering.