Pertanggungjawaban Pidana Ibu Kandung Atas Pembiaran Kekerasan Anak

Abstract

Abstrak
Kekerasan terhadap anak di lingkungan keluarga tidak selalu terjadi melalui perbuatan aktif. Dalam keadaan tertentu, sikap diam orang tua yang mengetahui adanya kekerasan dapat berubah menjadi persoalan pidana, terutama apabila orang tua tersebut mempunyai kewajiban hukum untuk melindungi anak. Artikel ini membahas pertanggungjawaban pidana ibu kandung yang membiarkan kekerasan terhadap anak hingga menimbulkan kematian, dengan menjadikan Putusan Pengadilan Negeri Medan Nomor 1540/Pid.Sus/2024/PN Mdn sebagai titik analisis. Penelitian menggunakan metode yuridis normatif melalui pendekatan perundang-undangan dan pendekatan kasus. Bahan hukum utama terdiri atas peraturan perundang-undangan, putusan pengadilan, dan literatur hukum pidana serta perlindungan anak. Hasil pembahasan menunjukkan bahwa frasa “membiarkan” dalam Pasal 76C Undang-Undang Perlindungan Anak dapat dipahami sebagai delik omisi apabila terbukti adanya kewajiban hukum untuk bertindak, kemampuan nyata untuk mencegah atau menghentikan kekerasan, kesalahan, serta hubungan antara sikap pasif dengan akibat yang dilarang. Ibu kandung memiliki kedudukan khusus sebagai pihak yang wajib menjamin keselamatan anak, tetapi pemidanaan tetap harus dibangun melalui pembuktian yang cermat, bukan sekadar karena status keibuan. Artikel ini menegaskan perlunya batas penafsiran yang proporsional agar perlindungan anak berjalan kuat tanpa mengabaikan asas legalitas, asas kesalahan, dan keadilan bagi terdakwa.

Kata kunci : Pertanggungjawaban pidana; ibu kandung; pembiaran; delik omisi; perlindungan anak.

Abstrack
The increase in cases of violence against children in Indonesia will reach 19,628 cases in 2024, most of which occur in the family environment. Not a few cases involve the passive attitude of biological mothers who allow violence to occur without any protective efforts to result in the death of the child. This encourages the author to examine more deeply the act of "letting go" which is categorized as omissi delicta, where the biological mother as the holder of the guarantor has an active legal obligation to protect the child based on Article 76C jo. Article 80 paragraph (4) of Law Number 35 of 2014 concerning Child Protection. This research is descriptive with a normative juridical method using a legislative approach and a case approach. Secondary data were obtained from primary, secondary, and tertiary legal materials, collected through literature studies and analyzed qualitatively descriptively. The results of the study show: First, the application of the law to the act of "allowing" is fulfilled if it is cumulatively proven that there is a rechtplicht, a real ability to act, and the non-performance of the obligation accompanied by an element of dolus. Second, the criminal liability of the biological mother in Decision Number 1540/Pid.Sus/2024/PN Mdn is built on three pillars: actus reus, mens rea, and toerekeningsvatbaarheid without any justification or excuse. Third, the judge's consideration in imposing a prison sentence of 3 years and 6 months considered the aggravating matter, namely that the defendant was a biological mother who was supposed to protect the victim, and rejected the construction of the inclusion of Article 55 of the Criminal Code because the defendant's actions had fulfilled the elements of the crime independently. It was concluded that the responsibility to protect children is not just a moral obligation, but a legal obligation whose violation through neglect is subject to strict criminal sanctions. It is recommended that lawmakers formulate clearer normative definitions of the "permissible" limits that can be punished, that law enforcement officials actively engage forensic psychologists, and that governments integrate gender perspectives and children's rights at every stage of the judicial process.

Keywords : Criminal Liability, Biological Mother, Omissi Delicta, Garantenstellung, Child Protection