URGENSI PROSES PERADILAN AFIRMATIf BAGI PEREMPUAN DIFABEL KORBAN PERKOSAAN

Faiq Tobroni

Abstract


ABSTRAK
Putusan Nomor 33/Pid.B/2013/PN.Kdl adalah mengenai kasus perkosaan yang melibatkan korban seorang perempuan tuna rungu berinisial SW. Berdasarkan
salinan putusan, SW tidak mendapatkan penerjemah selama proses persidangan. Dari beberapa permasalahan yang ditemui, penelitian ini mengulas tiga rumusan
masalah. Pertama, apakah kerugian dari hasil peradilan yang diterima SW terkait akses atas keadilan? Kedua, bagaimanakah perlakuan yang seharusnya diterapkan bagi korban difabel seperti SW? Ketiga, apa yang harus dilakukan negara untuk menjamin proses peradilan affirmative bagi kaum difabel? Penelitian
ini menggunakan metode penelitian kualitatif dengan data sekunder dan analisis kualitatif. Hasil penelitian memberikan beberapa kesimpulan. Pertama, tanpa
adanya penerjemah atau bahkan pendamping, kerugian berkaitan hak akses atas keadilan yang dialami SW menyebabkan korban tidak bisa memanfaatkan jaminan
keuntungan formil dari ketentuan Pasal 98 ayat (1) KUHAP. Kedua, perlakuan khusus dalam proses peradilan yang dibutuhkan difabel adalah proses affirmative.
Proses ini bertujuan menghilangkan diskriminasi bagi kaum difabel. Ketiga, dalam merealisasikan jaminan perlakuan affirmative bagi kaum difabel, harus terdapat revisi terhadap peraturan hukum terkait dan penajaman wawasan penegak hukum mengenai isu difabilitas.

Kata kunci: aksi afirmatif, diskriminasi hukum, difabel.


ABSTRACT
Court Decision Number 33/Pid.B/2013/PN.Kdr is a ruling regarding a rape of a deaf woman initials SW. Based on the copy of the decision, court did not provide SW an interpreter during the trial process. Of the several issues came upon, there are three formulations of the problem in questions reviewed in this analysis. Firstly, regarding access to justice, what are the losses suffered by SW from such trial process? Secondly, how should the legal treatment in judicial process to victims or persons
with different ability like SW? Thirdly, what should be through by the state to warrant a judicial affirmative action for the diffable? This study is done with the method of qualitative research using secondary data and qualitative analysis. The study results bring about several conclusions. First, in the absence of an interpreter or an assistant, the loss of the SW’s rights of access to justice has caused her inability to take advantage of the formal justice warranty on the provision of Article 98 Paragraph
(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Second, special treatment in the judicial process required by a diffable person is a judicial affirmative action. This action aims to eliminate discrimination for the difables. Third, in the realization of judicial affirmative action for the diffables, there should be revision of the relevant legal regulations and efforts to give insights and understanding to law enforcement authorities on the issue of diffability.

Keywords: affirmative action, legal discrimination, diffable.


Keywords


affirmative action; legal discrimination; diffable

Full Text:

PDF

References


Allingham, M. (2014). Justice as fairness, distributive justice. New York: Routledge.

Alston, P., & Goodman, R. (2013). International human rights: The successors to international human rights in context (Law, politics and morals). UK: Oxford University Press.

Aristotle. (1962). Nicomachean ethics. Ed. Ostwald, M. New York: Book Five.

Clifford, J. (2013). “Equality”, dalam The oxford hand book of international human righst law. Ed. Shelton, D. UK: Oxford University Press.

Djohansjah. (2010). Akses menuju keadilan. Yogyakarta: PUSHAM. Makalah Pelatihan Hak Asasi Manusia Untuk Jejaring Komisi Yudisial Republik Indonesia.

Gerapetritis, G. (2015). Affirmative action: Policies and judicial review worldwide. New York: Springer Cham Heidelberg.

Hepple, B. (2014). “Democratic participation in making and enforcing affirmative action schemes”, dalam Affirmative action: A view from the global south. Ed. Dupper, O., &

Sankaran, K. Stellenbosch, South of Africa: AFRICAN SUN MeDIA.

Jenlink, P. M., Stewart, L., & Stewart, S. (2012). Leading for democracy. A case-based approach to principal preparation. Maryland: Rowman & Littlefield Education.

O’Connel, K. (2012). Firewalk: Embracing different abilities. Bloomington Indiana U.S.A.: Balboa Press.

Roseberry, L. (2011). “Multiple discrimination”, dalam Age discrimination and diversity; Multiple discrimination from an age perspective. Ed. Sargeant, M. UK: Cambridge University Press.

Sadurski, W. (1985). Giving desert its due; Social justice and legal theory. Dordrecht, Holland: Springer Science.

Sales, B. D., Powell, D. M., & Duizend, R. V. (1982). Disabled persons and the law; State legislative issues. United States: American Bar Association’s Comission on the Mentally Disabled.

Syafi’ie, M., & Purwanti. (2014). Potret difabel berhadapan dengan hukum negara. Yogyakarta: Sigab.

Syafi’ie, M., et al. (2014). Pemenuhan hak atas peradilan yang fair bagi penyandang disabilitas. Yogyakarta: PUSHAM UII.

Syamsuddin, M. (2007). Operasionalisasi penelitian hukum. Jakarta: Rajagrafindo Persada.

Taket, A. (2012). Health equity, social justice and human rights. New York: Routledge.




DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.29123/jy.v8i3.62

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


Copyright (c) 2017 Jurnal Yudisial

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.