Dissenting Opinion

In the English dictionary, the word dissident is a form of the verb derived from the word adversary, meaning to oppose. " Comment" means comment, thought and feeling. Taken together, the statement becomes “ disagreement ”, meaning “disagreements arose over legal issues ”.

According to Wikipedia, dissent is the opinion of one or more judges.
Conference opinion on some topics.

Differences of opinion are non-binding and do not affect any decision. However, a dissenting opinion is more about respecting the judge's (or more's) opinion and the dissenting opinion may be related to changes in the law and other judges may appear to be involved in the process. court

Disagreements can have many reasons: different interpretations of the law, different principles or different facts. In the decision, the judge can write, "I agree with certain sections and disagree with certain sections."

Discrimination was born and raised in countries with common legal systems such as the United States and the United Kingdom. This principle was later developed and adopted in civil law countries such as Indonesia, the Netherlands, France and Germany.

Disagreements in Indonesia were initially sparked by the lack of a formal legal framework. This discrepancy was addressed for the first time in the Insolvency Act. #5 There are five Commercial Court judgments .

The Supreme Court ruled in his favor for other reasons. Article 9 of Law No. 2 on the Special Judges of 2000 states that the State Department's views are consistent with the position and the decision. In other words, legal issues are not the only big problem. The direct executive judge can automatically sign the decision. This is the form in which PERMA is formally recognized by the Supreme Court for dissent control.

There are other provisions on conflicting opinions in two (two) branches of law, namely the Judicial Authority Act and the Supreme Court Act.

Law No. Article 14(3) and (4) of the Judiciary Act 2009 provide for the jurisdiction of each judge and each judge is required to provide written comments or opinions on the issues dealt with and to become an unresolved party. 3) If no consensus is reached in the discussion round, the opinions of different judges should be included in the decision. The provisions of this article state that dissent is permissible and the opinions of members of the judiciary or board of trustees are challenged.

In Law No. Law No. 5 of the 2004 Amendment Act. AD. In 1985 the Supreme Court ruled in favor of Article 30(3) and (4) of Article 30(2), noting that every judge has a duty to make decisions. To provide a written comment or comment on the issue at hand. She will be part of the decision. Article (3) adds: “If no agreement is reached in the discussion, the Chief Justice's opinion should be incorporated into the decision.

Jimmy al-Shdiki believes that the opposition's urgency lies only in the decision-making process. Opponents will not be immediately prosecuted upon rejection or rejection. This view is to be understood in the context of the discussion about the decision of the Constitutional Court (final effect / no further legal solutions). So if he thinks it's true. The situation is different when it is used before a kindergarten court. First and foremost, there are still legal solutions for this. Jimmy Ashdeki believes that all judges on the Inquiry Committee may have different opinions on the matter .

In summary, the decision is the result of the judge's opinion and judgment using the free, fair and honest questions of law in Aku's case. Many factors that influence judges' decisions include:

1.   Enjoyment of commodities such as race, religion, education, etc.

2.   Automatic introduction, reasons related to work and formal education.

3. Environmental influences, environmental conditions , social and cultural factors affecting the judge's life, such as the control environment, etc. (Morad, 2005 ፡ 112).

Looking ahead, these factors are divided into realities and realities, namely:

1.   The main reasons are as follows

1. Moral attitudes are considered trivial, and that is what the judge's view is based on.
2. emotional position. A judge of simple character differs from a lesser judge in nature. The judgment of an angry judge differs from that of a patient judge.
3. The power of arrogant thinking, another attitude that influences decisions, is the arrogance of authority. Here the judge feels stronger and smarter than anyone else (the prosecutor, not to mention the accused).
4. A judge's behavior is also affected, but a judge's personal actions are primarily determined by his personal behavior.

2.   Reasons

1. The judge's cultural background, culture, religion and education certainly influence the judge's decision. While not perfect, they can at least influence the judge to make the decision.
2. The professionalism, intelligence and professionalism of the judge also influence the decision. (Murad, 2005 ፡ pages 117-118).

In the end, the judiciary and the community must make a fair and credible decision based on evidence from the court, not through repression of the perpetrator and through the media, but through the media. The decision must be made fairly and professionally as long as there are no irregularities in the decision.