ANALISIS PERTIMBANGAN HUKUM MAJELIS HAKIM DALAM MENJATUHKAN PUTUSAN BEBAS PADA PERKARA TINDAK PIDANA TERHADAP ANAK

Criminal cases involving children as witnesses present complex evidentiary challenges, particularly when there are differences in the assessment of child witness testimony between different levels of court. This study aims to analyze the differences in legal considerations between the District Court and the Supreme Court in assessing child witness testimony in criminal cases involving children, as well as to examine how the provisions on evidence in the Criminal Procedure Code
(KUHAP) and child protection values in the New Criminal Code (Law Number 1 of 2023) form the basis for judges in applying the principles of evidence. This studyuses a normative juridical method with a legislative approach and a case approach,
specifically to the Tulungagung District Court Decision Number
232/Pid.Sus/2024/PN Tlg and the Supreme Court Decision Number 7256
K/Pid.Sus/2025. The results of the study show that the District Court tends to assess
the testimony of child witnesses formalistically by focusing on the consistency of
the testimony in court, so that inconsistency is seen as the main basis for applying
the principle of in dubio pro reo. In contrast, the Supreme Court assesses child
witness testimony contextually by considering the interrelationship between pieces
of evidence and the psychological condition of the child, and places the principle
of in dubio pro reo as a last resort after evidence has been thoroughly examined.
These differences in approach reveal limitation The Criminal Procedure Code does
not yet provide substantive guidelines on the assessment of child witness testimony,
so that the value of child protection in the New Criminal Code serves as a
complementary ethical-legal framework in the practice of proving criminal cases
involving children.