ANALISIS PEMIDANAAN TERHADAP PELAKU UJARAN KEBENCIAN MELALUI MEDIA SOSIAL (Studi Putusan Nomor: 1484/Pid.Sus/2022/PN. Sby)

In rendering a verdict, judges are required to carefully and objectively consider various legal aspects in order to achieve the three fundamental pillars of law: justice, legal certainty, and utility. This research addresses the issue of how the judge evaluated the actions of hate speech perpetrator on social media in Decision Number: 1484/Pid.Sus/2022/PN. Sby, and how criminal sanctions for hate speech offenders align with the purposes of sentencing. The objective of this study is to analyze in the aforementioned decision, as well as the criminal sanctions imposed on the perpetrator in this final project is a juridical method with a normative approach. The study focuses on the analysis of legal doctrines, relevant legislation, and judicial decisions. Judicial considerations in rendering a verdict must be exercised with utmost care and precision. Judges are not only tasked with applying the law textually, but also with exploring, interprenting, and understanding the values of law and the sense of justice. In practise, each judicial decision must adhere to nationally applicable guidelines and formats. In the case analyzed, the judge applied a sentencing theory that leans toward the theory of balance, which emphasizes proportionality between the offense and the punishment. The imposition of a lighter sentence than what was demanded by the public prosecutor indicates that the judge took into account various mitigating factors, including the defendant’s personal background, the level of threat posed by the offense, and its impact on society.