Considerations of the Judges Panel on the Decision of Environmental Criminal Case Number 142/PID.B.LH/2020/PN.MNK at the Manokwari District Court

Environmental criminal case Number 142/PID.B.LH/2020/PN.MNK within the scope of the Manokwari Court was one of the cases with a focus on lawsuits based on Article 36 of Law Number 32 of 2009 concerning PPLH which had permanent legal force in 2020. The research purpose was to describe the considerations of the panel of court judges in the judge's decision on the case decision. The judge's decision in the environmental criminal case Number 142/PID.B.LH/2020/PN.MNK consisted of fulfilling all elements in Article 378 of the Criminal Code according to the Public Prosecutor's indictment, there were no legal facts that could be used as a reason to eliminate the defendant's guilt in the form of a forgiving reason, the purpose of punishment was not solely for revenge (repressive) but also preventive purposes (preventing criminal acts and to protect and served the state and society), the defendant's actions caused damage to the environment and the defendant was cooperative and polite in court. Furthermore, the prison sentence was as long as determined in the verdict, the defendant had been arrested and detained, so the period of arrest and detention that had been served by the defendant would be deducted entirely from the sentence imposed, furthermore, because there was no reason to release the defendant from detention, the evidence was determined as in the verdict, the defendant was declared guilty and would be sentenced, so the defendant must also be burdened with paying court costs as stated in the verdict and paying attention to Article 109 in conjunction with Article 36 paragraph (1) of the Republic of Indonesia Law Number: 32 of 2009 concerning Environmental Protection and Management and Law Number: 8 of 1981 concerning the Criminal Procedure Code and other laws and regulations.