Paradigma Konstruktivisme Dalam Penegakan Hukum Kasus Pembunuhan Berencana Oleh Ferdy Sambo

This research discusses the Supreme Court decision Number: 813 K/Pid/2023 regarding the criminal law enforcement of premeditated murder committed by Ferdy Sambo. This decision changed the sentence for convicts from the death penalty to life imprisonment. This penal reduction needs to be studied using a constructivist paradigm. The constructivist paradigm will examine the operation of law in society which is influenced by people's experiences, whether social, religious, cultural, including ideological. The Supreme Court's decision provides legal considerations regarding mitigating reasons for the convict. This is the difference with the decisions of the lower courts. From a constructivist perspective, this is not quite right. It is necessary to state the factors of community experience in making decisions for convicts. Moreover, there was a dissenting opinion by the judge in adjudicating the Supreme Court's cassation decision Number: 813 K/Pid/2023. The difference of opinion is based on legal considerations that the reason for self-defense is forced, the self-respect or honor of the convict does not need to be considered. Then there are allegations of immoral acts whose truth has not been clarified by the convict to the victim. The reality of the experience was not explored enough in the decision, both social factors and environmental factors of the convict.This research discusses the Supreme Court decision Number: 813 K/Pid/2023 regarding the criminal law enforcement of premeditated murder committed by Ferdy Sambo. This decision changed the sentence for convicts from the death penalty to life imprisonment. This penal reduction needs to be studied using a constructivist paradigm. The constructivist paradigm will examine the operation of law in society which is influenced by people's experiences, whether social, religious, cultural, including ideological. The Supreme Court's decision provides legal considerations regarding mitigating reasons for the convict. This is the difference with the decisions of the lower courts. From a constructivist perspective, this is not quite right. It is necessary to state the factors of community experience in making decisions for convicts. Moreover, there was a dissenting opinion by the judge in adjudicating the Supreme Court's cassation decision Number: 813 K/Pid/2023. The difference of opinion is based on legal considerations that the reason for self-defense is forced, the self-respect or honor of the convict does not need to be considered. Then there are allegations of immoral acts whose truth has not been clarified by the convict to the victim. The reality of the experience was not explored enough in the decision, both social factors and environmental factors of the convict.