Ratio Decidendi Putusan Mahkamah Agung RI Atas Upaya Hukum Penuntut Umum Terhadap Barang Bukti Tindak Pidana Korupsi Dalam Perspektif Teori Keadilan Bermartabat

Abstract

Munculnya perkara tindak pidana korupsi yang dikasasi dengan alasan pengembalian barang bukti jarang sekali terjadi bahkan hampir tidak pernah terjadi. Kasasi yang dilakukan oleh Penuntut Umum berkaitan dengan pengembalian barang bukti telah menghasilkan putusan Mahkamah Agung RI Nomor 1108 K /PID.SUS/2019 tanggal 13 Juni 2019. Alasan Penuntut Umum untuk melakukan upaya hukum kasasi sebagaimana dikemukakan dalam putusan Mahkamah Agung RI tersebut bahwa Pengadilan Tinggi tidak menerapkan atau menetapkan peraturan hukum sebagaimana mestinya dan cara mengadili tidak dilaksanakan menurut undang-undang, yakni barang bukti dikembalikan ke Bea dan Cukai untuk dilakukan penyidikan, padahal sudah tidak ada lagi perkara pidana penyelundupan. Dasar hakim dalam menetapkan putusan adalah “Demi Keadilan Berdasarkan KeTuhanan Yang Maha Esa”. Pertimbangan hakim itulah yang menjadi roh dari seluruh materi putusan, Ratio Decidendi Mahkamah Agung yang telah mengabulkan alasan kasasi dan mengadili sendiri sesuai dengan ketentuan Pasal 253 ayat (1) KUHAP. Pertimbangan hakim tersebut merupakan terobosan hukum yang dilakukan guna meluruskan pemaknaan yang berbasis pada Keadillan Beramartabat tanpa menyimpangi alasan kasasi menurut ketentuan hukum.

The decision for a corruption case that provoked an appeal by a public prosecutor i.e. cassation due to the court of appeal decision granting the return of evidence to begin a different process, has rarely occurred or can be stated as rarely happening. The cassation carried out by the Public Prosecutor regarding the return of evidence has resulted in a decision by the Supreme Court of the Republic of Indonesia Number 1108 K/PID.SUS/ 2019 dated 13 June 2019. The reason for the Public Prosecutor's appeal, as stated in the decision of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Indonesia, is that the High Court did not apply a stipulated legal rule properly, and the trial method was not carried out according to law, namely evidence in the form of thousands of illegal cellphones being returned to Customs and Excise for use in other cases, even though there were no other potential suspects/defendants. The Supreme Judge's basis in making the decision is "For the sake of Justice Based on the One and Only God." It has been argued that the judge's ratio decidendi should be regarded as the norm with a spirit of the law, which granted the reasons for cassation and tried the cassation case itself based on the provisions of Article 253 paragraph (1) of the Criminal Procedure Code. This research has found that the Supreme Judge's consideration is a legal breakthrough based on justified by the theory of Dignified Justice, since the decision is without deviating from the reason for cassation according to the due process or legal provisions (de lege lata)