ANALISA YURIDIS KEBIRI KIMIA BAGI PELAKU KEJAHATAN SEKSUAL TERHADAP ANAK MENURUT KODE ETIK KEDOKTERAN

Responding to the increase in sexual crimes that occurred in the community, the government took responsive steps by adding additional punishment, namely chemical castration in Law Number 17 Year 2016. However, this chemical castration actually raises pros and cons among the public because of the intersection with human rights. In addition, because the implementation of chemical castration involves health aspects, chemical castration also intersects with Article 5 of the medical code of ethics so that the Muhammad Aris case becomes an example of hospital rejection in carrying out chemical castration. This polemic then becomes a debate, so a more in-depth study is needed related to the juridical review of the application of chemical castration sanctions according to positive law in Indonesia and the application of chemical castration sanctions associated with doctors who refuse to do chemical castration. The purpose of this study is to determine the juridical issues of the application of chemical castration from the law to the implementing regulations and an in-depth study related to the standardization of doctor's refusal associated with the code of ethics and the obligation to comply with the law. The method used in this research is normative with statutory, conceptual, and comparative state approaches. The result of this research shows that the government has issued Law Number 17 Year 2016 as a legal basis for judges in imposing chemical castration sanction as an additional punishment. This chemical castration sanction is applied with the consideration that this punishment is not mandatory. This is left to the Panel of Judges to decide whether it will be imposed or not or become an alternative. The duty of the judge is to uphold the law and uphold justice The meaning of the sentence above is that the judge enforces the law, meaning that the judge is obliged to decide the case submitted to him, regardless of who the perpetrator of the crime is (equality before the law). The second finding states that the refusal of doctors in the implementation of chemical castration has a connection with the medical code of ethics, but it is important not to be considered so that this does not lead to obstruction of justice..