Analisis Perbedaan Pertimbangan Hakim dalam Pembuktian Unsur Eksploitasi pada Tindak Pidana Perdagangan Anak (Studi Putusan : Pengadilan Negeri Nomor : 310/PID.B/2020/PN MTR dan Putusan Mahkamah Agung Nomor : 119K/PID.SUS/2022)

Abstract

Human trafficking is a crime against humans that has long occurred in the world and is an act that is contrary to human dignity and is a violation of human rights. Human trafficking is also a crime committed in an organized manner, in which the perpetrators commit the crime in groups The victims of humanitarian crimes always occur against men, women, and children. The problems raised in this thesis are how is the legal regulation related to the crime of child trafficking, how is the relationship between proving the elements, proving the criminal act with the form of the judge's decision and what is the ratio decidendi of the judge in deciding the case, how is the difference in the judge's consideration in proving the elements of exploitation in the crime of child trafficking (Study of District Court Decision Number 310/PID.B/2020/PN MTR and Supreme Court Decision Number 119L/PID.SUS/2022). The research method used in writing this thesis is normative juridical research that examines positive law in Indonesia by using literature studies and secondary data as legal material. In addition, the description of this research is descriptive analysis. From the writing of this thesis, the results obtained are the regulations related to the crime of child trafficking can be studied in the Criminal Code, Law No. 21 of 2007 concerning the crime of trafficking in persons and Law No. 35 of 2014 concerning the crime of child trafficking. The relationship between the proof of the elements, the proof of the criminal offense with the form of the judge's decision and the ratio decidendi of the judge in deciding the case are interrelated which influence each other in deciding a criminal case. In proving the element of exploitation in the crime of child trafficking (Study of District Court Decision Number 310/PID.B/2020/PN MTR and Supreme Court Decision Number 119L/PID.SUS/2022) there are differences in the judges' considerations, which only see exploitation an sich in terms of sexual exploitation and forced labor services on the orders of the Defendants.