Kasus Ini Menunjukan Bahwa Hukum di Indonesia Masih Tajam Ke Bawah

Summary

The 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

00:00

📺 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.

05:02

⚖️ 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.

Keywords

💡Tajam ke bawah, tumpul ke atas

This phrase is a critique of the legal system in Indonesia, suggesting that the law is strictly enforced on lower-class citizens ('tajam ke bawah') but lenient towards the elite or upper-class individuals ('tumpul ke atas'). The video uses this term to describe cases where minor infractions by poor citizens are heavily punished, while the wealthy often evade serious consequences, highlighting the inequality in legal enforcement.

💡Undang-Undang Dasar 1945

The Undang-Undang Dasar 1945 (1945 Constitution) is the foundational legal document of Indonesia. The video references it, particularly Article 28D, which ensures that every citizen has the right to legal protection and fair treatment under the law. The video contrasts this ideal with the reality of legal bias, showing how this principle is often violated in practice.

💡Pasal 28D Ayat 1

This article in the Indonesian Constitution guarantees legal protection and equal treatment before the law. The video refers to it to emphasize that the law should be applied fairly to all citizens, regardless of their social status. However, it critiques how this principle is often disregarded, especially when it comes to the unequal treatment of the poor versus the wealthy.

💡Korupsi

Corruption ('korupsi') refers to the misuse of power for personal gain, particularly by public officials. The video discusses how corrupt officials often receive lighter sentences or special treatment in prison, despite causing significant harm to the country. This is contrasted with the harsh punishments faced by lower-class citizens for minor offenses.

💡Gugatan ganti rugi

A 'gugatan ganti rugi' is a lawsuit for compensation. The video describes how a group of falsely accused street performers ('pengamen') filed for compensation after being wrongfully imprisoned. The legal battle over this lawsuit reveals the complexities and inconsistencies in Indonesia's legal system, with debates about the statute of limitations and fairness in the judiciary.

💡Vonis

A 'vonis' is a legal verdict or judgment. The video discusses how verdicts often reflect the unequal treatment of citizens in the legal system. For example, wealthy individuals or officials often receive lenient sentences for serious crimes, while lower-class citizens receive harsh sentences for minor infractions, reinforcing the idea of 'tajam ke bawah, tumpul ke atas.'

💡Hakim

A 'hakim' is a judge who has the authority to make legal rulings. The video raises concerns about the fairness and impartiality of judges in Indonesia, questioning whether they apply the law equitably to all citizens. The case of the street performers seeking compensation highlights this issue, as different judges can interpret the same laws differently.

💡Ahli hukum

An 'ahli hukum' is a legal expert or lawyer. The video questions the role and integrity of legal experts, especially when their interpretations of laws differ in significant ways. It emphasizes that having a legal degree does not necessarily mean one upholds justice, and it asks viewers to consider what it truly means to be an expert in law.

💡Kasta bawah

'Kasta bawah' refers to the lower class or the economically disadvantaged in society. The video uses this term to describe how the legal system in Indonesia disproportionately punishes those from lower socioeconomic backgrounds, often for minor crimes, while the elite or 'kasta atas' can escape severe punishment through wealth and influence.

💡Salah tangkap

'Salah tangkap' means wrongful arrest. The video highlights a case where four street performers were wrongly accused of murder and jailed for three years. This case is used to show how vulnerable the poor are to legal injustice, particularly when they lack the resources to defend themselves in court.

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