CRIMINAL LIABILITY IN THE ACT OF THEFT (VIDE ARTICLE 362 KUHP) OF GOLD WHICH IS COMMITTED ON A CONTINUOUS BASIS (VOORTGEZETTE HANDELING VIDE ARTICLE 64 KUHP)

  • Fany Adistyawan Universitas Dr. Soetomo
  • Ach Rubaie Universitas Dr. Soetomo
  • M Khoidin Universitas Dr. Soetomo
  • Dudik Djaja Universitas Dr. Soetomo
Keywords: criminal liability, theft, continuing action

Abstract

Continuing actions are a combination of several actions committed by a person, where between one action and another action there has never been a judge's decision that has permanent legal force, so that the perpetrator is subject to a certain method of punishment, as stipulated in article 64 of the Criminal Code. This combined form in Dutch is known as "Voortgezette Handling". The form of continuous action can be identified if a person commits several actions and some of these actions are separate crimes but among these actions, there is such a close relationship with one another that several of these actions must be considered as one continuous action. Continued theft is explained in Article 362 of the Criminal Code Jo Article 64 Paragraph (1) of the Criminal Code.
The formulation of the problem in this study is how is the legal responsibility for the crime of gold theft by continuing Article 362 of the Criminal Code in conjunction with Article 64 paragraph (1) of the Criminal Code and law enforcement for the crime of gold theft by continuing Article 362 of the Criminal Code in conjunction with Article 64 Paragraph (1) of the Criminal Code. The type of method applied in this research is normative legal research, where normative legal research is a scientific research procedure to find truth based on scientific logic from a normative perspective. using a statutory regulation approach is analyzed using qualitative normative methods with inductive logic, namely thinking from specific matters to general matters. Criminal responsibility is the responsibility of a person for the crime he has committed. Strictly speaking, that person is responsible for the crime he committed. Thus, the occurrence of criminal liability because there has been a criminal act committed by someone. Criminal responsibility is essentially a mechanism built by criminal law to react to violations of the "agreement to refuse" a certain act.
Law enforcement by the Pasuruan Police through investigation and investigation the conclusion that it is strongly suspected that the suspect has violated Article 362 of the Criminal Code in conjunction with Article 64 Paragraph (1) of the Criminal Code. Meanwhile, the basis for the judge's consideration in deciding the case is that the legal facts that emerged during the trial, prove that all the elements of Article 362 Jo. Article 64 paragraph (1) of the Criminal Code has been fulfilled, so the Defendant must be legally and convincingly proven to have committed the crime as charged in the Public Prosecutor's single Indictment.

References

Book

Ali, M. (2015). Dasar-dasar Hukum Pidana. Jakarta: Sinar Grafika.

Ariman, R. & Raghib, F. (2016). Hukum Pidana. Malang: Setara Press.

Hamzah, A. (2008). Hukum Acara Pidana Indonesia. Jakarta: Sinar Grafika.

Hiarij, E. O. S. (2014). Prinsip-prinsip Hukum Pidana. Yogyakarta: Cahaya Atma Pustaka.

Huda, C. (2006). Dari Tiada Pidana tanpa Kesalahan Menuju kepada Tiada Pertanggungjawaban Pidana tanpa Kesalahan. Jakarta: Pranada Media.

Ibrahim, J. (2015). Teori dan Metodologi Penelitian Hukum Normatif. Malang: Bayumedia Publishing.

Lamintang, P. A. F. (1997). Dasar-dasar Hukum Pidana Indonesia. Bandung: Citra Aditya Bakti.

Moeljatno. (2003). Kitab Undang-Undang Hukum Pidana. Jakarta: Bumi Aksara.

Prasetyo, T. (2010). Hukum Pidana. Depok: Raja Grafindo Persada.

Journal

Akpomera, E. (2015). International Crude Oil Theft: Elite Predatory Tendencies in Nigeria. Rev. Afr. Polit. Econ. 42: 156-165.

Berbotto, A. A. & Chainey, S. (2021). Theft of Oil from Pipelines: An Examination of Its Crime Commission in Mexico Using Crime Script Analysis. Global Crime 22(4): 265-287.

Besley, T. & Mueller, H. (2018). Predation, Protection, and Productivity: A Firm-Level Perspective. American Economic Journal: Macroeconomics 10(2): 184-221.

John, I. B., Konya, K. T., & Ejo-Orusa, H. (2019). Employee Dissatisfaction and Workplace Theft of Retail Firms in Port Harcourt, Nigeria. Int. J. Adv. Acad. Res. 5: 44-57.

Butinda, L. D., Lameke, A. A., Nunn, N., de la Sierra, R. S., & Winkler, M. (2020). Traditional Belief Systems and Economic Behavior: Evidence from Beer Retailers in the Eastern DRC.

Cohen, L. E., & Felson, M. (1979). Social Change and Crime Rate Trends: A Routine Activity Approach. American Sociological Review 44(4): 588-608.

Dyer, J. (2023). The Fruit (and Vegetables) of Crime: Protection from Theft and Agricultural Development. Journal of Development Economics 163: 1-15.

Fafchamps, M. & Minten, B. (2009). Insecurity and Welfare: Evidence from County Data. J. Dev. Stud. 12(4): 625-671.

Goh, E., & Kong, S. (2018). Theft in the Hotel Workplace: Exploring Frontline Employees’ Perceptions towards Hotel Employee Theft. Tour. Hosp. Res. 18: 442-455.

Klooster, D., (2000). Community Forestry and Tree Theft in Mexico: Resistance of Complicity in Conservation? Dev. Change 31: 281-305.

Pendleton, M. R. (1997). Looking the Other Way: The Institutional Accommodation of Tree Theft. Qual. Sociol. 20: 325-340.

Poulston, J. (2008). Rationales for Employee Theft in Hospitality: Excuses, Excuses. J. Hosp. Tour. Manag. 15: 49-58.

Romsom, E. (2022). Global Oil Theft: Impact and Policy Responses. The United Nations University World Institute for Development Economics Research (UNU-WIDER) 16: 1-45.

Rusmiati. (2017). Konsep Pencurian dalam Kitab Undang-undang Hukum Pidana dan Hukum Pidana Islam. Syiah Kuala Law Journal 1(1): 340.

Schechter, L. (2007). Theft, Gift-giving, and Trustworthiness: Honesty is Its Own Reward in Rural Paraguay. Am. Econ. Rev. 97(5): 1560-1582.

Sharma, T., Pandey, K. K., Punia, D. K., & Rao, Joji. (2016). Of Pilferers and Poachers: Combating Electricity Theft in India. Energy Res. Soc. Sci. 11: 40-52.

Shigihara, A. M. (2013). It’s Only Stealing a Little a Lot: Technique of Neutralization for Theft Among Restaurant Workers. Deviant Behav 34: 494-512.

Soares, R. R. (2015). Welfare Costs of Crime and Common Violence. J. Econ. Stud. 42(1): 117-137.

Song, G. W., Cai, L., Liu, L., Xiao, L. Z., Wu, Y. H., & Yue, H. (2023). Effects of Ambient Population with Different Income Levels on the Spatio-Temporal Pattern of Theft: A Study Based on Mobile Phone Big Data. Cities 137: 1-13.

Wong, J., Chun, Y., Blankenship, B., Urpelainen, J., Ganesan, K., Bharadwaj, K., & Balani, K. (2021). Perceptions and Acceptability of Electricity Theft: Towards Better Public Service Provision. World Dev 140.

Xu, Z. (2022). The Conceptual Basis of Farmers’ Action: A Case Study of Crop Theft on a Corporate Farm. Sciol. Stud.

Yang, X. Y., & Chen, Q. P. (2023). Property Rights and Theft Wrongs? A Preliminary Analysis of Stealing in the Extractive Industries. The Extractive Industries and Society 15: 1-8.

Legislation

Pemerintah Indonesia. (1945). Undang-Undang Dasar Negara Kesatuan Republik Indonesia Tahun 1945.

Pemerintah Indonesia. (1981). Undang-Undang Republik Indonesia Nomor 8 Tahun 1981 tentang Hukum Acara Pidana.

Pemerintah Indonesia. (2023). Undang-Undang Republik Indonesia Nomor 1 Tahun 2023 tentang Kitab Undang-Undang Hukum Pidana.

Published
2024-05-30
How to Cite
Adistyawan, F., Rubaie, A., Khoidin, M., & Djaja, D. (2024). CRIMINAL LIABILITY IN THE ACT OF THEFT (VIDE ARTICLE 362 KUHP) OF GOLD WHICH IS COMMITTED ON A CONTINUOUS BASIS (VOORTGEZETTE HANDELING VIDE ARTICLE 64 KUHP). Jurnal Poros Hukum Padjadjaran, 5(2), 185-202. https://doi.org/10.23920/jphp.v5i2.1442