ANALISIS YURIDIS TERHADAP PERBEDAAN DASAR PERTIMBANGAN HAKIM DALAM KASUS TINDAK PIDANA NARKOTIKA (Studi Putusan Nomor 158/PID.B/2011/PN.MKW dan Putusan Nomor 281 K/PID.SUS/2013)

Shofyan Wirayudha, Dr.Bambang Sudjito SH., M.Hum Fakultas Hukum Universitas Brawijaya Email: SWirayudha@gmail.com  ABSTRAK Hakim didalam mempertimbangkan putusan utamanya dalam tindak pidana narkotika bagi penyalahguna narkotika wajib memahami betul Undang-undang Republik Indonesia Nomor 35 tahun 2009 tentang Narkotika. Didalam prosesnya wajib bagi hakim untuk melihat keterangan para saksi serta alat bukti selama persidangan demi putusan yang bersifat adil baik untuk terdakwa maupun dimata masyarakat. Praktek perkara tindak pidana narkotika yang telah diputus oleh Hakim Pengadilan Negeri Manowkari dengan nomor 158/PID.B/2011/PN.MKW terdakwa diputus Pasal 127 dan tidak terbukti secara sah dengan dakwaan Primair, Subsidair, dan lebih Subsidair dimana hal tidak sesuai dengan dakwaan yang diberikan oleh Jaksa Penuntut Umum. Didalam dakwaan Jaksa Penuntut Umum Manokwari terdakwa terbukti secara sah memenuhi unsur Pasal 111 “tanpa hak atau melawan hukum menanam, memelihara, memiliki, menyimpan, menguasai atau menyediakan Narkotika Golongan I dalam bentuk tanaman berupa daun ganjaâ€. Pada akhirnya kasus ini diajukan kasasi oleh Jaksa Penuntut Umum Manokwari hingga Hakim Mahkamah Agung membatalkan putusan Hakim Pengadilan Negeri Manokwari dengan putusan yang baru Putusan Nomor 281 K/PID.SUS/2013 Kata Kunci: Hakim, Narkotika, Putusan Hakim  ABSTRACT The judge in considering his decision especially in the narcotics criminal law for drug abuse should deeply understand Indonesian State Constitution Number 35 year 2009 about Narcotics. The judge must see the remarks from the witness in the process, and also the evidence during the trial for the fair and good decision for the defendant or society. The case practice for narcotics which were already sentenced by the Manokwari District Court Judge number 158/PID.B/2011/PN.MKW defendant were sentenced Article 127 and did not proven legally for Primary, Subsidiary indictment, and more to subsidiary in which this things did not go along with the indictments which was given by Prosecutor. In the Manokwari Prosecutor indictments defendants proven as guilty legally by fulfilling the Article 111 "without rights or against the law for planting, growing, having, keeping, dominating or providing Group I Narcotics in the form of marijuana plant". Eventually, this case was asked petition for appeal by Manokwari Prosecutor until Supreme Court Judge canceled the Manokwari Distrct Court Judge decision. Keywords: Judge, Narcotics, Judge Decisio