Perbandingan Putusan Hakim Dalam Perkara Tindak Pidana Kekerasan Terhadap Anak (Studi Kasus Putusan No.102/Pid.Sus/2020/PN.Sdr dan Putusan No. 35/Pid.Sus/2021/PN.Sdr)

The purpose of this study is to examine and analyze the application
of the law of district court judges, to examine and analyze the
considerations of the PN judges in passing the decision No.
102/Pid.Sus/2020/PN.Sdr and decision No. 35/Pid.Sus/2021/PN.Sdr to
result in criminal disparities.
This research method uses normative juridical research, reviewing
from the aspect of legislation while normative is a process to find a new
rule, legal doctrines and legal principles to answer the legal problems
faced. The author compiles using literature or library data collection,
namely research is carried out by researching library materials or called
secondary. The secondary data used are in the form of laws and
regulations relating to violence against children, district court decisions,
books, journals, legal theses, official government documents, doctrines of
legal experts and other literature such as websites.
The results of this study indicate that the panel of judges at the
Sidrap District Court in deciding cases of violence against children,
especially in the two decisions studied by applying Article 80 paragraph 1
in conjunction with Article 76C of the Child Protection Act. Then evaluate
the evidence in accordance with Article 184 paragraph 1 of the Criminal
Procedure Code. Furthermore, considering the elements of the article
charged with legal facts and making a consideration and then believing
that the defendant is proven to have committed a crime of violence against
children. Whereas the considerations used by the panel of judges in trying
the two cases resulted in a criminal disparity, namely by considering the
intent and purpose of the defendant committing violence. In decision No.
102/Pid.Sus/2020/PN.Sdr. The panel of judges prioritized a coaching
punishment because the defendant was a teacher who used violence to
educate children. In contrast to decision No. 35/Pid.Sus/2021/PN.Sdr,
what is the purpose of the defendant in committing violence, namely not to
educate children. That the statement is not in accordance with the author's
view because it is contrary to the principle of equality before the law and
the provisions of Article 4 paragraph 1 of the Law on Justice.
Keywords: Violence, Children, Disparity