Kasus Ini Menunjukan Bahwa Hukum di Indonesia Masih Tajam Ke Bawah
Summary
TLDRThe transcript discusses the imbalance in Indonesia's legal system, where the law often favors the wealthy and powerful, while being harsh on the poor. It provides examples of unjust cases where minor offenses by low-income individuals result in severe punishment, contrasting this with lenient treatment of wealthy criminals. The transcript also highlights the legal struggles of wrongfully convicted individuals, such as four street musicians, and explores the complexities of interpreting laws, with differing opinions from legal experts. It questions the integrity of the justice system and emphasizes the need for fairness and accountability.
Takeaways
- 📺 The speaker believes that good police officers seem to only exist on TV, as in reality, many are seen as unfair.
- ⚖️ The speaker highlights that the 1945 Indonesian Constitution states that all legal issues should be resolved justly according to the law.
- 🔪 The phrase 'the law is sharp downward but dull upward' is used to describe how laws are harsh for the poor but lenient for the rich.
- 💰 Wealthy individuals, especially officials, often escape severe punishment due to their ability to afford expensive lawyers.
- 🧑⚖️ The speaker argues that the law is easily influenced by wealthy criminals, which causes inequality in justice.
- 🍫 Examples of harsh punishment include cases where poor people were jailed for stealing items of very low value, such as cocoa or fruit.
- 🛏️ Meanwhile, those convicted of serious crimes like corruption often receive lighter sentences and special privileges in prison.
- 👮♂️ The speaker mentions a case where four street performers were wrongfully convicted of murder and harshly treated in prison for three years before being proven innocent.
- 🕰️ A legal debate exists over whether these individuals can seek compensation due to the complexity of legal deadlines and interpretations.
- ⚖️ The speaker questions the integrity of legal experts, as different interpretations of the law are leading to disputes, even among judges and lawyers.
Q & A
What does the speaker suggest about the portrayal of good police officers?
-The speaker suggests that good police officers only seem to exist on television and are not commonly found in real life.
What is meant by 'law must be enforced fairly for all people' as per the script?
-This refers to the principle that justice should be applied equally to everyone, regardless of their social or economic status, as highlighted in the Indonesian Constitution, Article 28D.
What is the meaning behind the phrase 'law is sharp downward but blunt upward'?
-The phrase means that the law tends to be harsher on the lower classes (ordinary or poor people) but lenient on the upper classes (wealthy or powerful individuals).
How does the speaker describe the difference in legal treatment between rich and poor individuals?
-The speaker argues that poor people receive strict punishments even for minor offenses, while wealthy or powerful individuals can often evade harsh penalties due to their ability to hire expensive lawyers.
What examples are given to illustrate unequal justice in Indonesia?
-Examples include cases like a grandmother stealing three cocoa beans, thefts of watermelons and flip-flops, which were met with severe punishments, while corrupt officials receive lighter sentences despite greater harm to the nation.
What recent legal case involving street musicians is discussed in the transcript?
-The case of four street musicians who were wrongfully accused of murder and imprisoned for three years is discussed. They were forced to confess under police pressure, only to be proven innocent later with the help of legal aid.
Why was the compensation claim of the street musicians rejected in court?
-Their compensation claim was rejected because it was deemed to have been submitted too late, exceeding the legal three-month limit after the wrongful conviction. However, there is a legal debate over whether this rule applies to their case.
What legal disagreement is highlighted in the script regarding the street musicians' case?
-There is a disagreement between legal experts on the interpretation of the law regarding the timing of their compensation claim. One side argues it was too late, while the other side claims it was within the time frame due to a delayed verdict.
What qualities does the speaker believe a legal expert should possess?
-The speaker believes that a true legal expert should not only have a formal legal education but also possess a sense of justice and uphold ethical behavior.
How does the speaker conclude the discussion on the judicial system and justice?
-The speaker concludes by emphasizing the importance of taking responsibility and upholding justice in both legal matters and personal behavior, referencing biblical passages to underline the importance of ethical conduct.
Outlines
📺 The Reality of Law Enforcement
The speaker reflects on the reality of law enforcement in Indonesia, expressing skepticism about the fairness and effectiveness of the system. They feel that good police officers only seem to exist on TV, while in real life, justice is often influenced by social status. The speaker highlights how the legal system is meant to provide equal protection and fairness for everyone as stated in the 1945 Constitution (Article 28D), but it often appears biased—'sharp to the lower class, blunt to the upper class.' This bias is evident when the poor face harsh punishments, while the wealthy or powerful often escape severe penalties by hiring expensive lawyers. The speaker questions whether the fault lies with the poor for not being able to defend themselves or with a legal system easily swayed by wealth and influence.
⚖️ Injustices in Legal Cases
The speaker delves into specific cases where the legal system has shown glaring inequities, like the unjust punishments given to individuals for minor offenses, such as stealing small amounts of food or items, compared to the light sentences given to corrupt officials. The examples of Nenek Minah, who was jailed for stealing a small amount of cocoa, and Aal, who faced legal consequences for stealing sandals, are used to illustrate how harsh the law can be on the poor. On the other hand, high-profile cases of corruption rarely result in significant punishment, with corrupt individuals even enjoying luxurious prison conditions. A recent case of four street musicians wrongfully convicted for murder also showcases how flawed the system can be. They were imprisoned for years before being exonerated, yet their claim for damages was dismissed due to a technicality, leaving them without justice.
Mindmap
Keywords
💡Tajam ke bawah, tumpul ke atas
💡Undang-Undang Dasar 1945
💡Pasal 28D Ayat 1
💡Korupsi
💡Gugatan ganti rugi
💡Vonis
💡Hakim
💡Ahli hukum
💡Kasta bawah
💡Salah tangkap
Highlights
The speaker expresses skepticism about the integrity of law enforcement, suggesting that good officers are only seen on TV.
The Indonesian constitution guarantees the right to equal treatment under the law, as per Article 28D, Section 1.
There is criticism of how the law in Indonesia appears 'sharp downward and blunt upward,' implying that justice is harsher for the poor and lenient for the rich.
A major concern is the unequal application of justice, where wealthy individuals can afford legal defense, while the poor face harsher punishments for minor offenses.
Examples of this disparity include the harsh sentencing of individuals like Nenek Minah for stealing cocoa beans worth under Rp10,000.
Another case mentioned is the theft of watermelon, bananas, and flip-flops, illustrating how small crimes by the poor receive disproportionate punishment.
In contrast, high-profile corruption cases, which cause significant harm to the country, result in lighter punishments and luxurious prison conditions.
The speaker references a wrongful arrest case where four street performers were accused of murder, held for three years, and suffered police brutality.
The wrongful arrest victims faced difficulties when seeking compensation, with their lawsuit deemed expired due to legal technicalities.
The case highlights inconsistencies in the legal system, where different interpretations of the law led to ongoing debates between legal professionals.
The debate centers around a legal clause specifying a three-month window for filing lawsuits after a verdict, which some argue should apply from the release of the acquittal document.
The conversation questions whether those labeled as legal experts genuinely uphold justice or manipulate the system for personal gain.
Despite legal inconsistencies, the final decision in any legal case lies with the judge, whose verdict carries ultimate authority.
The speaker calls for participation, responsibility, and justice from all members of society, urging adherence to both legal and moral standards.
Biblical references are used to emphasize the importance of fairness and integrity, suggesting that justice should be guided by moral principles.
Transcripts
[Musik]
Seperti apa jujur ya saya saya bicara
dalam dari dalam lubuk hati saya
onom-ekonom polisi yang baik itu maksud
saya polisi-polisi yang baik itu cuma
ada di TV aja sih coba
[Musik]
mereka berdasarkan undang-undang dasar
1945esmas negara
huknya segala sesuatu permasalahan di
Indonesia dapat diselesaikan dengan
jalur hukum Hal itu seperti yang
tercantum dalam undang-undang Dasar
1945 pasal 28d ayat 1 yang bunyinya
Setiap orang berhak atas pengakuan
jaminan perlindungan dan kepastian hukum
Yang Adil serta perlakuan yang sama di
hadapan hukum Nah maka dari itu berarti
hukum harus ditegakkan secara adil bagi
seluruh rakyat
jangan sampai seperti yang banyak
terjadi sekarang hukum terasa tajam ke
bawah tapi tumpul ke atas hm apa itu
maksudnya istilah tersebut muncul ketika
mulai banyaknya pengenaan vonis hukuman
yang dirasa enggak adil antara kaum
kasta bawah dengan kaum kasta atas nah
jadi maksudnya hukum tajam ke bawah
tumpul ke atas itu kalau masyarakat
biasa-biasa apalagi orang miskin yang
melanggar hukum meskipun Enggak
fatal-fatal banget dia bakal dikasih
hukuman yang benar-benar sesuai
undang-undang tanpa ada belas kasihan ya
kalau perlakuan gini juga diberlakukan
terhadap orang kaya apalagi pejabat sih
no problem ya masalahnya giliran yang
melanggar hukum itu orang kasta atas
apalagi pejabat mereka tidak divonis
hukuman yang
setimpal mungkin karena orang-orang kaya
atau Pejabat itu bisa bayar ahli hukum
alias pengacara kali ya jadi bisa minta
dibela dengan bayaran banyak agar
bagaimanapun caranya mereka bisa lolos
dari hukuman atau dapat hukuman yang
ringan kalau kayak gini gimana nasib
orang miskin yang enggak bisa bayar
pengacara
mahal Terus kalau dipikir-pikir semua
putusan hukum ada di tangan penegak
hukum kan guys jadi yang kurang tepat
itu salahnya orang miskin yang ggak bisa
membela dirinya atau hukum yang mudah
dipengaruhi pelaku kriminal atau
kejahatan yang kaya dalam membela
dirinya Hmm gimana menurutmu
guys kalau kita ngikutin kabar berita
pasti bisa nemuin banyak kasus hukum
yang menunjukkan hukum itu tajam ke
bawah tapi tumpul ke atas sebut saja
kasus pencurian tiga biji kakau yang
nilainya tidak lebih dari Rp10.000 oleh
nenek Minah yang kemudian divonis 1
setengah bulan
kasus pencurian semangka kasus pencurian
pisang dan kasus pencurian sandal jepit
oleh Aal kasus-kasus ini menggambarkan
betapa bobroknya penegakan hukum bangsa
kita banyak kasus korupsi yang sangat
merugikan negara kita terlepas dari
jeratan hukum mendapat hukuman ringan
bahkan para terpidana kasus korupsi
mendapat fasilitas-fasilitas yang mewah
di penjara
H nah yang masih hangat nih berita
tentang korban salah tangkap yaitu empat
orang pengamen menurut beritanya sih
mereka ini dituduh melakukan pembunuhan
terhadap korban yang ditemukan tewas di
bawah jembatan Cipulir mereka dipaksa
mengaku bahwa merekalah yang membunuh
korban kemudian ditahan hingga 3 tahun
dan mendapatkan perlakuan kasar dari
pihak kepolisian selama itu hingga pada
akhirnya dibantu oleh lembaga bantuan
hukum dan ternyata mereka tidak bersalah
karena perlakuan dipaksa mengaku dan
diperlakukan kasar di penjara mereka
mengajukan ganti rugi ke pengadilan
namun sayangnya guys gugatan mereka
tidak dipenuhi Katanya sih gugatannya
udah KAD
luarsa pengajuan gugatan ini masih
berlanjut sih karena tetap ada pembelaan
dari kuasa hukum pengamen tersebut
dengan Dasar pasal yang sama di satu
sisi gugatannya dinilai kadaalwarsa
karena menurut undang-undang maksimal
diajukan 3 bulan setelah putusan atau
vonis bersama salah dan ternyata
diajukan setelah 3 tahun di sisi lain
dengan penafsiran berbeda undang-undang
yang dimaksud ada kata atau 3 bulan
setelah putusan vonis bersalah atau
setelah salinan putusan vonis tidak
bersalah yang baru terbit Maret 2019
lalu yang kalau dihitung sampai
pengajuan gugatan belum sampai 3 bulan
wah wah wah yang benar yang mana ya guys
hayo para ahli hukum wajib komen nih
[Musik]
hmm tapi yang dimaksud ahli hukum yang
gimana dulu nih mungkin bisa dikatakan
setiap orang yang jebolan pendidikan
hukum bisa dikatakan ahli hukum ya
apalagi yang sudah berprofesi
menggunakan gelar
hukumnya tapi Bukankah kalau jadi ahli
hukum juga harus punya sikap hukum yang
baik Nah kalau melihat gugatan ganti
rugi dari para pengamen tadi gimana nih
guys yang sama-sama dikatakan ahli hukum
saja sudah berbeda penafsiran pasal
undang-undang hukum pidana dan jadi
perdebatan sesama mereka kira-kira
apakah kedua ahli hukum tersebut yaitu
Hakim yang memutuskan gugatan dan
pengacara mereka bisa memiliki sikap
hukum yang baik gimana nanti putusan
akhirnya ya bagaimanapun keputusan akhir
tetap di Palu sang Hakim Oke tanpa
mengkritik atau menyalahkan
[Musik]
siapapun
berpartisipasi secara aktif bertanggung
jawab dan menjunjung tinggi nilai
keadilan serta keteladanan dalam
menggunakan hak dan menjalankan
kewajibannya sebagai anggota masyarakat
Kristen dan warga negara 1 Korintus 2
ayat 6 dan 15 serta Mazmur 111 dan
[Musik]
10
5.0 / 5 (0 votes)