TINJAUAN YURIDIS PUTUSAN HAKIM TINDAK PIDANA EIGENRICHTING DALAM BENTUK PENGEROYOKAN SECARA TERANG-TERANGAN (PENETAPAN PENGADILAN NEGERI INDRAMAYU NOMOR 190/PID.B/2022/PN. IDM,345/PID.B/2014/PN.IDM, 392/PID.B/2011/PN. IDM)
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.24252/iqtishaduna.v7i2.63345Abstract
Abstrak
Penelitian ini memfokuskan kajian pada bentuk pertanggungjawaban pidana dalam perkara tindak pidana main hakim sendiri (eigenrichting) pada tiga putusan Pengadilan Negeri Indramayu, yaitu Putusan Nomor 190/Pid.B/2022/Pn.Idm, 345/Pid.B/2014/Pn.Idm, dan 392/Pid.B/2011/Pn.Idm. Objek kajian menitikberatkan pada analisis unsur kesalahan dan pemenuhan asas pertanggungjawaban pidana, serta rasionalitas pertimbangan hakim dalam menentukan berat ringannya pidana. Penelitian menggunakan metode hukum normatif dengan analisis kualitatif terhadap bahan hukum primer berupa putusan dan peraturan perundang-undangan, serta bahan hukum sekunder dari literatur akademik mengenai konsep eigenrichting. Penelitian juga mengkaji latar fakta hukum setiap perkara untuk menilai konsistensi yuridis antara unsur delik dan pidana yang dijatuhkan. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa seluruh terdakwa dalam ketiga putusan secara sah dan meyakinkan memenuhi unsur kesengajaan serta pengetahuan atas akibat perbuatannya, sehingga pertanggungjawaban pidana tetap diberlakukan meskipun dilatarbelakangi motif pembelaan terhadap korban kejahatan. Pada Putusan Nomor 190, hukuman lebih berat dijatuhkan karena adanya tingkat kekerasan yang lebih tinggi serta akibat luka serius pada korban. Sebaliknya, Putusan Nomor 345 dan 392 memperoleh pidana lebih ringan karena kerugian dan dampak sosial dinilai lebih rendah. Pertimbangan hakim tidak hanya didasarkan pada penerapan norma KUHP (aspek yuridis), tetapi juga pada upaya menjaga wibawa hukum dan pencegahan vigilantisme di masyarakat (aspek sosiologis), sekaligus menegaskan bahwa tindakan balas dendam tidak dapat menjadi alasan pembenar (aspek filosofis). Dengan demikian, pemidanaan diarahkan untuk menegaskan supremasi hukum serta memberikan efek jera terhadap praktik eigenrichting.
Kata Kunci: Tindak pidana, Eigenrichting, Pertanggungjawaban pidana, Pertimbangan Hakim
Abstract
This research focuses on criminal liability in vigilantism (eigenrichting) cases contained in three decisions of the Indramayu District Court, namely Decision No. 190/Pid.B/2022/Pn.Idm, No. 345/Pid.B/2014/Pn.Idm, and No. 392/Pid.B/ 2011/Pn.Idm. The study emphasizes the analysis of the element of fault and the fulfillment of criminal liability principles, as well as the judicial reasoning behind the determination of sentencing severity. This research employs a normative legal method with qualitative analysis of primary legal materials in the form of court decisions and statutory provisions, as well as secondary legal materials derived from scholarly literature concerning the concept of vigilantism. It also examines the factual background of each case to assess the consistency between the legal elements of the offense and the punishment imposed. The findings indicate that all defendants in the three decisions legally and convincingly fulfilled the elements of intent and awareness of the consequences of their actions, thereby affirming their criminal liability despite motives of defending victims of crime. In Decision No. 190, a more severe sentence was imposed due to the higher degree of violence and serious injuries inflicted upon the victim. Meanwhile, Decisions No. 345 and No. 392 received lighter punishments, as the resulting harm and social impact were considered relatively minor.The judges’ considerations were not solely based on the application of the provisions of the Criminal Code (legal approach), but also on efforts to uphold the authority of law and prevent vigilantism within society (sociological approach), while emphasizing that revenge cannot be justified as a legal defense (philosophical approach). Thus, the criminal sanctions aim to reinforce the principle of the rule of law and deter the recurrence of vigilantism.
Keywords: criminal act, Eigenrichting, criminal liability, Judge consideration
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Hilmy Amjad Nada, Muhammad Nibros Hammam

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Once an article was published in the journal, the author(s) are:
- to retain copyright and grant to the journal right licensed under Creative Commons License Attribution that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship.
- permitted to publish their work online in third parties as it can lead wider dissemination of the work, with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal
- continue to be the copyright owner and allow the journal to publish the article with the CC BY-NC-SA license
- receiving a DOI (Digital Object Identifier) of the work.





