ANALISIS PUTUSAN HAKIM DALAM PERLINDUNGAN HAK DIFABEL KORBAN TINDAK PIDANA PERKOSAAN (Kajian Putusan Nomor 190/Pid.B/2018/PN.Btl)

Decision Number 190/Pid.B/2018/PN.Btl is the decision of the Bantul District Court regarding a rape case that resulted in a woman with intellectual disabilities with the initials DA as a victim. During the trial process, the judge did not provide a companion to the victim. This situation is of course not in accordance with the mandate of the law and CRPD which has been ratified by Indonesia. Departing from these problems, the compilers used two problem formulations as follows. First, what is the ideal justice for disabled victims of rape in accordance with the Covenant on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities? Second, how is the judge's response to the rights of persons with disabilities in handling case number 190 / Pid.B / 2018 / PN.Btl? This study used a qualitative research method with the type of field research, namely the field data used as supporting data obtained through information and opinions from respondents determined by the researcher. This research is also supported by library research, by examining various documents as well as literature and laws and regulations that support this research. The approach in this study uses a normative legal approach. The results of the research explain that the laws and regulations have actually brought the spirit of protection and fulfillment of the rights of persons with disabilities. This includes the protection of the rights of people with disabilities who are in conflict with the law. However, in practice, in Case Number 190 / Pid B 2018 / PN Btl. In the Bantul District Court, there was a case of diffable victims of the criminal act of rape whose trial process was not in accordance with the law. Because during the trial process the victim did not get the companion that the victim should have received. Whereas in accordance with Article 13 of the CRPD, states parties must ensure effective accessibility to justice for persons with disabilities on the basis of equality with others in the judicial process, the accessibility referred to is physical accessibility and non-physical accessibility. Physical accessibility is the ease given to diffables to access physical infrastructure in the judicial process so that a disability-friendly judicial system is created. Non-physical accessibility In general, the standard of non-physical services for people with disabilities in court is based on the principle of communication support for people with disabilitie