ANALISIS YURIDIS KRITIS TERHADAP PUTUSAN HUKUM JESSICA KUMALA WONGSO (Studi Putusan No. : 777/Pid.B/2016/PN.JKT.PST.)

ABSTRACT

Legal verdict is an official decision issued by judicial institutions, such as courts, to resolve a legal dispute or case. This decision is the outcome of a judicial process involving hearing arguments from both parties, examination of evidence, and application of relevant laws to the case at hand. The legal verdict against Jessica Kumala Wongso found her guilty of the murder of her friend, Wayan Mirna Salihin, by using cyanide-laced liquid mixed into the victim's drink. Juridical analysis of the legal verdict in Jessica Kumala Wongso's case has garnered attention in the context of Indonesian judiciary. This analysis considers various aspects, including evidence presented during the trial, the legal process followed, and legal considerations underlying the judge's decision. Through a critical juridical approach, the sufficiency of evidence, fairness in the trial process, and interpretation of laws used in sentencing Jessica Kumala Wongso are evaluated. This verdict has elicited diverse reactions from the public, with some perceiving it as justice for the victim, while others find the decision controversial, raising questions about the adequacy of evidence and the legal process followed. Research findings suggest that judicial verdicts do not solely consider the victim's perspective in determining guilt; rather, to ascertain truth, the judicial process must adhere to mechanisms mandated by the law, such as the application of the Criminal Procedure Code (KUHAP) and principles of justice that serve as the foundation for judges in adjudicating cases.

Keywords: Critical Juridical Analysis, Legal Verdict