Juridicial Review Of The Implimentation Of Rehabilitated Criminal Punishments For Criminal Abuses Of Narcoticts Group I (Sabu) (Case Study Of Central Jakarta District Court Decision Number: 66/Pid.Sus/2018/Pn.Jkt.Pst, Date 8 March 2018)
Keywords:Indicative speech, application of regulations, narcotics abuse
Narcotics crime is increasingly prevalent and has spread in all circles ranging from children, adolescents, and adults. Most of them are victims of narcotics abuse or narcotics abusers, so it is necessary to rehabilitate them. In the Narcotics Law No. 35 of 2009 concerning Narcotics every Victim of Abusers or Abusers and Addicts must be rehabilitated both medical and social. As for the problems in the research based on case number 66 / Pid.Sus / 2018 / PN.JKT.PST is how the legal arrangements regarding rehabilitation for abusers class I narcotics and whether the application of punishment regarding rehabilitation in the decision of the Central Jakarta District Court Number 66 / Pid.Sus / 2018 / PN.JKT.PST is appropriate according to law. Judge's consideration in imposing a crime on case Number 66 / Pid.Sus / 2018 / PN.JKT.PST to Siska Ariani Intan committing a crime of misuse of class I narcotics for themselves by referring to the Supreme Court Circular Letter (SEMA) No. 4 of 2010 applied so that the defendant undergoes medical rehabilitation which is intended so that the defendant can recover as before. Based on the Supreme Court Circular No. 4 of 2010 concerning the Placement of Abuse, Victims of Abuse and Narcotics Addicts into the Institute for Medical Rehabilitation and Social Rehabilitation if when caught the evidence of Sabu group usage is 1 (one) gram. Meanwhile, the evidence found from the defendant's hand was 0.0273 grams. Is it according to law? And whether the verdict is appropriate and appropriate based on SEMA Regulation Number 4 of 2010?