Previous 1 / 33 Next

PUTUSAN .. Nomor : 851 K/P!D/2014 " DEMI KEADILAN BERDASARKAN KE'~LlH ANAN YANG r ~At-iA ~S '\ MAHKAM AH AGU N G rnemeriksa perkara pidana dalam tingkat Kasast telah memutusl<an scbrgai berikut dalam perkara T erdakwa : Nama Tempat lahir : ABDULLAH RUSIK Bin MUHTAR; Pangkalan Bulian; Umur I tanggallahir : 35 tahun/ 27 Mei 1978; .· Jenis kelamin Laki-laki; Kebangsaan Indonesia; Tem pat tinggal Dusun 1:, Desa Lubuk Bintialo, Kecam2t""•n Satang 1-lari Leko, Kabupaten Musi Banyuas n, Agama Pekerjaan islam : Wiraswa:;t;; : Terdakwa berada di dalam tahanan : 1. Penyidi'< sejak tanggal 08 Agustus 2013 sampai. dengan tanggai 27 Agustus 2013; 2. Perpanjangan oleh Penuntut Umum sejak tanggal 28 Agustus 20·; 3 sampai dengan tanggal 06 Oktober 2013 ; 3. Penuntut Umum sejak tanggal 03 Oktober 2013 sampai dengan tnncgnl 22 Oktober 2013 ; 4. tv1ajelis Hakim Pengadilan Negeri sejqk t::1nggal 21 Oktober 2013 sampai dengan ta'lggal 19 November 201 3 5. PerpanJangan Ke tua Pengadtlan Negen sejal< tanggal 20 Ncvf..:mbcr 20 13 sampai tanggal 18 Januari 2014 ; 6. Perpanjangan Wakil Ketua Pengadilan Tinggi sejak tanggal 19 j anuari 2014 sampai dengan tanggal17 Februari 2014 ; 7. Perpanjangan Wakil Ketua Pengadilan Tinggi ke - 2 sejak tanggal 18 .. Februari 2014 sampai dengan tanggal19 Maret 2014 ; 8. Majelis Hakim Pengadilan Tinggi sejak 19 Februari 201 4 sarnpai dengan tanggal 20 Maret 2014; ~I 9. Perpanjangan Plh Ketua Pengadilan Tinggi sejak tanggal 21 Maret 20 14 sampai dengan tcmggal 19 Mei 201 4, Hal. 1 dari 33 hal. Put. No. 851 KJP!D /2014

Select target paragraph3

● ● ●

Abdullah Rusik bin Muchtar

CASE BRIEF

Jurisdiction

Indonesia

Nationalities

Indonesian

Case Title: Abdullah Rusik bin Muchtar

Age at Offence: 32

Age Group at Offence: Adult (18 to 59)

Gender: Male

Religious Group at Offence: Islam

Jurisdiction - Geolocation

Latitude: -6.293782809685137

Longitude: 106.84001863002779

Jurisdiction - Geolocation (linked CASE BRIEF): Indonesia

Contributing TRP Partner

Institute for Criminal Justice and Reform (Indonesia)

Latest Country's Death Penalty Status

Retentionist

Case Current Status: Closed: Reprieve by Executive

Year when sentenced to Death Row: 2010s: 2014

Method of Execution: Firing/Shooting: Squad

Rights Allegedly Violated

Fair Trial and Due Process: Fair investigation & fair disclosure

Nature of Offences for Death Penalty

Murder: Single Victim

Case Background (300 words max): Abdullah Rusik bin Muhtar (32 years old) is an Indonesian citizen who was arrested along with Indra Atmaja bin Hijazi and Dobi Sugara bin Ramdon by the Police for planning the murder of the victim named Iskandar Bin Syamsu by preparing a sharp weapon in the form of a sword/machete because the defendant was hurt towards the victim and according to the defendant the victim had stolen 2 (two) of the defendant's sensau machines and the victim also did not want to pay the proceeds of the purchase of wood to the defendant amounting to Rp 800,000 (eight hundred thousand rupiah) and the defendant was not happy that the victim worked as a thug at PT. Sentosa is happy together. The public prosecutor charged the defendant with life imprisonment, but the panel of judges of the court of first instance to the cassation level handed down the death penalty against the defendant.

Defence Arguments (200 words max.): The defendant's legal counsel at the court of first instance in his defense only pleaded with the panel of judges to impose a fair sentence on the defendant. Meanwhile, the defendant's legal counsel at the appellate court objected that the panel of judges of the court of first instance did not consider the facts revealed at the trial regarding the defendant's health and physical condition. In addition, the panel of judges of the first instance has also set aside the clinical certificate of psychiatric diagnosis from the Dr. Ernaldi Bahar Hospital in South Sumatra which explained that the defendant had a mental disorder or was not perfectly intellectually or insane.

Judgement with Headnotes (200 words max): The panel of judges at the appellate level considered that the reason that the defendant had a mental disorder was far-fetched because based on the minutes of the trial of the defendant's examination, it turned out that the defendant could answer the questions asked smoothly at the trial and did not show any signs of mental disorder. Therefore, the objections raised by the defendant's legal counsel cannot be granted. Then the panel of judges also considered that the defendant must be convicted in accordance with the article violated and the imposition of the death sentence given by the panel of judges at the first level was appropriate and correct.

Legal Representation Received

Trial: State Legal Aid
Appeal: State Legal Aid
Second Appeal: State Legal Aid
Pre-trial: Unknown

Legislation Related to the Offence(s): Law Number 1 of 1946 concerning the Criminal Code

Case Brief Entry Status: Entry in Progress

Language of Case Materials

Bahasa Indonesia

Is the case brief featured?: Yes

Primary Documents

Appeal Judgement - Abdullah Rusik bin Muhtar.pdf
Indonesian
Download View
Cassation Judgement - Abdullah Rusik bin Muhtar.pdf
Indonesian
Download View
First Instance Judgement - Abdullah Rusik bin Muhtar.pdf
Indonesian
Download View

Death Penalty Defence - Asia

Select target paragraph3

Abdullah Rusik bin Muchtar

Primary Documents

Notifications