ANALISIS YURIDIS PERTANGGUNGJAWABAN TINDAK PIDANA PEMBANTUAN/ MEDEPLICHTIGEDALAM KASUS KERUSUHAN DEMONSTRASI

Abstract

The decision of the Panel of Judges at the Central Jakarta District Court in the criminal
case Number: 844/Pid.B/2019/PN.Jkt.Pst, is one of the cases of national concern. The decision
relates to the Crime of Assistance/Medeplichtige which raises questions regarding what is the
judge's benchmark in deciding the case so that the defendants are interpreted as actors
participating in assisting anarchist crimes and what actions can be categorized as assistance
in a crime, because in that case it was found that the co-perpetrator of giving drinking water
and water for washing his face to the participants in the riot action during the demonstration
was sentenced to a criminal sentence even though he had no malicious intent to commit a
crime. The purpose of this research is to find out the liability for the criminal assistance/
medeplichtige and to find out the suitability between the arrangements regarding the crime of
assisting/ medeplichtige and decision No.844/Pid.B/2019/PN.Jak.Pst related to the
demonstration riot case.
The results of this study there are two main points. First, that accountability related to
criminal acts of assistance/medeplichtige in Indonesia is regulated in Article 57 of the Criminal
Code where in the decision related to the demonstration riot case there are reasons that can
negate accountability in a person. Second, after outlining and analyzing the related decisions,
it was found that there was a judge's mistake in interpreting the suitability between the actions
committed by the Defendants and the arrangement for co-operation crimes because there was
no causality between the act and the circumstances after the act was committed and the judge's
judgments or judgments in this case were not objective, because it is not based on the facts
revealed in court.
Keywords: Medeplichtige-Demonstration-Criminal Liability