ANALISIS PENGAJUAN KASASI TERHADAP PUTUSAN PENGADILAN HAK ASASI MANUSIA (HAM) AD HOC DALAM PERKARA PELANGGARAN HAK ASASI MANUSIA BERAT OLEH ANGGOTA KEPOLISIAN REPUBLIK INDONESIAud(STUDI PUTUSAN MAHKAMAHudAGUNG NOMOR 02 K/PID.HAM AD HOC/2006)ud

摘要

This law research studies and address the problem concerning the appeal-udto-the Supreme Court filing against the ad hoc human rights court’s decision inudsevere human right breach case by the Indonesian Republic’s police officers inudaddition also find out the rationale of appeal-to-the supreme office of the counseludfor prosecution of Indonesian Republic against the decision of freedom in theudsevere human right breach criminal cases with the accused Kombes Polisi Drs.udDaud Sihombing, SH. In order to find out the Supreme Court judge’s rationale inudexamining and deciding the appeal-to-the Supreme Court filing against theuddecision of freedom in the severe human right breach criminal cases with theudaccused Kombes Polisi Drs. Daud Sihombing, SH.ududThis thesis employed a normative law research. The study the writer didudwas prescriptive in nature. In writing the research, the writer employed statueudapproach). The data type used in this study was secondary data. The data sourceudused in normative research was secondary data source. Technique of collectinguddata employed in this research was library study. Technique of analyzing dataudused was deductive syllogism using: grammatical and systematical interpretationudmethods.ududConsidering the result of research, it can be concluded that the rationale ofudappeal-to-the supreme office of the counsel for prosecution of IndonesianudRepublic against the decision of freedom in the severe human right breachudcriminal cases with the accused Kombes Polisi Drs. Daud Sihombing, SH is thatudhuman rights court in Makasar First Instance Court that had decided in examiningudand trialing the court “did not apply the law regulation or applied the lawudregulation improperly” (Article 253 clause (1) letter a KUHAP), that is theudChamber of Judge interpreted incorrectly the “crime against humanity” asudregulated in Article 9 of Act No. 26 of 2000. The Supreme Court Judge’s rationaleudin Examining and Deciding the appeal-to-the supreme office of the counsel forudprosecution of Indonesian Republic against the decision of freedom in the severeudhuman right breach criminal cases with the accused Kombes Polisi Drs. DaududSihombing, SH that the reasons proposed by the kasasi requester cannot beudjustified because Judex Factie does not apply the law incorrectly, moreoverudregarding the assessment of verification result that is reward in nature about audreality. The Supreme Court argues that in fact the Kasasi requester cannot proveudthat the decision is the impure liberation. The decision is stated as rejected and theudaccused is liberated, so that the case expense in all levels of judicial level isudimposed to the State.ududKeywords: appeal-to-the Supreme Court (Kasasi), sever Human Right Breach.ud