Highlights of the Judge's Interpretation of Illegal Control of a State House Is Associated with Material Unlawful Characteristics

Abstract

Housing and Settlements causes a person to have the status of a defendant on the basis that the occupant of the house is not the owner, which is only valid if there is the owner's approval or permission. Meanwhile, there is the Law Number 1 Year 2011 concerning housing and settlements, which revokes The Law Number 4 Year 1992. Judges' considerations are drawn up after linking the changes to the validity of the law based on Article 1 paragraph (2) of the Law Number 1 Year 1946 concerning the Indonesian Criminal Code (KUHP). It becomes odd when the judge's decision is associated with the unlawful nature of a case. The purpose of writing is to show the inaccuracy of the judge's interpretation of Article 1 paragraph (2) of the Criminal Code and the nature of the material law against a case. The results show that the Law Number 4 Year 1992, in conjunction with the RI Law Number 1 Year 2011, has a different point of view on the meaning of handling a case, so the case is not included in the category of fulfilling the elements of Article 1 paragraph (2) of the Criminal Code. The judge has interpreted the validity of Article 1 paragraph (2) of the Criminal Code incorrectly because the judge only prioritizes the principle of legality by Article 1 paragraph (1) of the Criminal Code but overrides the nature of violating material law.