Analisis Putusan Peradilan Negeri Jakarta Selatan Nomor: 1418/Pid.B/2007/PN.Jak.

Sel

a. Case Position :
The defendants together along with other defendants performs several acts which must be
viewed as independent acts so as to constitute multiple crimes, the defendants have
committed conspiracy, attempt or several crimes, abetting the commission of the crime of
terrorism by intentionally using violence or threat of violence with the intent to create an
atmosphere of terror or fear of the public, the action done twice by the defendants, all of
the action is as follow. First shooting of students of high school of economics 2 Poso
students. Second beheaded/mutilation of a student of christian highschool of Poso. first
case, students shooting, on November 6 2005, Ardin (defendants in other case) and the
2nd defendants, conducting a plan for the attack toward the christian people around the
area, the action of planning include Basri and ustad Hasanudin along side with the frist
defendants, the attack will be conducted in the christian resident around in PlN
neighborhood, the planning session of the action goes for 2 days, the action also include
the survey process in the plan, in november 8 2005, Ardin (defendants in other case)
alongside with the First defendants are able to conduct the attack proses, at 17.45 the first
Defendants staring the attack with the revolver gun with 6 bullets, the attack start from
one possible victims kiki, but kiki manage to run away, after kiki run away. The first
Defendants later force to come into the house and found 2 woman sitting in the front of
the house, the first Defendants manage to shoot two of the woman 4 time in their face
and their body, and then run away. The attack happened to two young women as victims,
ivone There is an entrance wound from the left cheek through to the right cheek with a
diameter of approximately one centimeter coma there is red fluid coming out of the
mouth coma several upper front teeth are broken, the second victims is siti Yuliani,
suffered the same injured as the victim, the action as follows prove that defendant others
(defendatns in other case). In October 2005, the planing session began, the action taking
place in October 29, with 6 target, but only 4 target shows up, the action was taken
damaged and hurt 4 people, but as a result in 5 civilians are dead due to the attack.
b. Law analysis :
Both defendants are being sued for several law as follows :
- Primair article 15 jo article 7 regulation Replacement of law number 1 of 2002,
that later Confirmed by law number 15 of 2023
- Subsidar article 15 Jo article 6 regulation Replacement of law number 1 of 2002,
that later Confirmed by law number 15 of 2023
- Subsidar article 15 Jo 9 regulation Replacement of law number 1 of 2002, that
later Confirmed by law number 15 of 2023

In the aforementioned decision, there were several considerations that formed the basis
for the court to sentence the defendants. These considerations included:
1. Evil Conspiracy: The court considered that the defendants committed an evil conspiracy
in preparing the planning and execution of the act, which was proven through meetings
between the defendants and other defendants and coordination in preparing and executing
the act. The action of planning and execution defined the evil conspiracy, how the
defendant's and others are planning th3 action to the very detailed and being prepared in
group.

2. Use of Force: The court considered that the defendant intentionally used violence or
threat of violence in committing the act. The use of force are quite obvious the use of
force are manifested in the action of treathen and hurting the victims, this create a use of
force, the use of force letter create a new atmosphere of fear within the society

3. Elements of Terrorism: The court considered that the defendant's actions constituted an
act of terrorism that not only violated the articles on loss of life, but also had a broader
reach in an effort to protect society. The way the defendats targeting certain groups of
people create a new force of threatened for society.

4. Testimony and Evidence: The court considered witness testimonies and evidence that
supported the charges against the defendant, so that the defendant was found guilty and
punished accordingly.

5. Mitigating Sentences: The court also considers mitigating circumstances, such as witness
testimonies that serve as mitigating circumstances for the defendant.

These considerations formed the basis for the court to sentence the defendants in this
case. The defendants being found guilty of terrorism-related charges, including planning
and carrying out attacks on Christian individuals, using weapons such as machetes and
pistols, and causing injuries and fear in the community. The court concluded that the
defendants were guilty based on evidence and witness testimonies, and they were
sentenced to prison. Additionally, the confiscated evidence was to be used in other legal
proceedings, and the defendants were also ordered to bear the costs of the trial. The
court's decision highlighted the serious and heinous nature of the crimes committed,
resulting in the defendants being sentenced to prison each 19 years for the first
defendatns and 10 years for the second defendants.