The Implementation of Punishment Theories in the Verdict of Narcotics Case by Judge in Indonesia
This paper aims to find out the implementation of the theory of punishment in the judgment of narcotics crime cases by judges in Indonesia, since the verdict does not only contains the conclusions of the proven legal facts in the trial but also the theoretical justifications that can be justified by the judges on their verdicts. Method of approach used in this study was socio legal research with qualitative data analysis which involved a group of state court judges in charge of narcotics cases as the respondents. The research results are expected to give a complete picture of the implementation of punishment theory by judges in Indonesia in making the verdict of narcotics crime by implementing the theory of punishment related to the type of crime, the character of the crime, the motive of the perpetrator in order to make the qualified verdict which is able to give special preventive effects and general preventive effects. Further, punishment has a function to make the convict a good and useful person. When deciding the verdict of narcotics crime cases, a judge needs take a particular theory of punishment into account because the purpose of punishment is not only bringing benefits to society in general, but also benefitting the convict himself.