Analisis Pertimbangan Hakim dalam Menjatuhkan Sanksi Pidana Lebih Tinggi dari Tuntutan Penuntut Umum terhadap Pelaku Tindak Pidana Korupsi dihubungkan dengan Kebebasan Kehakiman (Studi Kasus MA No. 510K/Pid.Sus/2014)

Abstract

Corruption in Indonesia is classified as an extraordinary crime, law enforcement was doneunconventional ways. Through the Supreme Court Decision No. 510K / Pid.Sus / 2014 Sugiarto defendant, the judge decided 18 years of imprisonment, the sentence was higher than the prosecution or commonly named Ultra Petita. However, based on Criminal law, Ultra Pelita has not been clearly regulated by the government. The method of this thesis is a descriptive analysis, and using normative juridical approach. Technique of data collection obtained by library research with using conducting in-depth assessment of secondary data that include primary legal materials, secondary law and tertiary legal materials. Then the data analyzed through qualitatively normative. From this research can be drawn the conclusion that the reason that the judge handed down the verdict is overdemands of the prosecution because the corruption suspect did to enrich themselves that actually it taken from state funds, so that the defendant appropriate and fair to sentenced weight commensurate with his actions. In judicial practice, judges are allowed to doing anUltra Petita as long asa justice law can be reached by the maximum limit of the corridor criminal sanction which specified in the provisions or article.