TINJAUAN YURIDIS TERHADAP TINDAK PIDANA MENYEBARKAN UJARAN KEBENCIAN MELALUI MEDIA SOSIAL YOUTUBE (STUDI PUTUSAN NO.240/PID.SUS/2020.PN.CBN) = JURIDICAL REVIEW ON THE CRIME OF SPREADING HATE SPEECH THROUGH SOCIAL MEDIA YOUTUBE (STUDY OF DECISION NO.240/PID.SUS/2020.PN.CBN)

ABSTRAK MUHAMMAD RIFKY NORAZIF (B011181593). Dengan judul “Tinjauan Yuridis Terhadap Penyebaran Paham Radikal yang Mengancam Keamanan Negara Melalui Media Sosial (Studi Putusan Nomor 240/Pid.Sus/2020/PN Cbn)”. Di bawah bimbingan Syarif Saddam Rivanie selaku Pembimbing. Latar Belakang: Perkembangan teknologi informasi telah mengubah pola penyebaran ideologi, termasuk paham radikal yang kini menyebar luas melalui media sosial. Fenomena ini menimbulkan tantangan baru bagi sistem hukum pidana, khususnya dalam membedakan antara kebebasan berekspresi dan ujaran kebencian yang mengancam keamanan negara. Tujuan: Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk menganalisis kualifikasi tindak pidana penyebaran paham radikal dari perspektif hukum pidana positif serta mengevaluasi penerapan pasal-pasal pidana dalam Putusan Nomor 240/Pid.Sus/2020/PN Cbn. Kasus ini melibatkan terdakwa Agus Nurrochman yang menyebarkan video ajakan permusuhan berbasis agama melalui media sosial dan dijatuhi pidana 2 tahun penjara serta denda Rp100.000.000,00. Metode: Penelitian ini menggunakan pendekatan normatif dengan metode pendekatan peraturan perundang-undangan dan pendekatan kasus. Bahan hukum primer dan sekunder dianalisis secara deduktif-kualitatif untuk menjawab rumusan masalah secara sistematis. Hasil: Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa (1) penyebaran paham radikal melalui media sosial dapat dikualifikasikan sebagai tindak pidana berdasarkan Pasal 28 ayat (2) jo Pasal 45A ayat (2) UU ITE, serta Pasal 160 dan Pasal 107 KUHP terkait penghasutan dan makar; dan (2) dalam putusan a quo, penerapan hukum pidana dilakukan secara tekstual namun belum memperhatikan konteks ideologis dan dampak sosial dari konten yang disebarkan. Hal ini menimbulkan kekhawatiran terhadap potensi multitafsir dan penyalahgunaan pasal-pasal ujaran kebencian. Kesimpulan: Putusan Nomor 240/Pid.Sus/2020/PN Cbn menunjukkan bahwa meskipun unsur hukum terpenuhi, namun hakim belum mempertimbangkan secara komprehensif aspek sosiologis dan tafsir konstitusional atas norma ujaran kebencian. Oleh karena itu, diperlukan pedoman interpretatif resmi dan pendekatan penegakan hukum yang lebih kontekstual, agar tidak menyimpang dari prinsip keadilan dan kebebasan berekspresi dalam negara hukum demokratis. Kata Kunci: Hukum Pidana, Paham Radikal, Media Sosial ABSTRACT MUHAMMAD RIFKY NORAZIF (B011181593). Titled "Legal Review of the Spread of Radical Ideology Threatens State Security Through Social Media (Study of Decision Number 240/Pid.Sus/2020/PN Cbn)." Under the guidance of Syarif Saddam Rivanie as Supervisor. Background: Developments in information technology have changed the pattern of ideological dissemination, including radical ideology, which is now widespread through social media. This phenomenon poses new challenges for the criminal law system, particularly in distinguishing between freedom of expression and hate speech that threatens state security. Objective: This study aims to analyze the qualifications of the crime of spreading radical ideology from a positive criminal law perspective and evaluate the application of the criminal articles in Decision Number 240/Pid.Sus/2020/PN Cbn. This case involves defendant Agus Nurrochman, who distributed a video inciting religious hostility through social media and was sentenced to two years in prison and a fine of Rp100,000,000.00. Methods: This research uses a normative approach using the statute approach, conceptual approach, and case approach. Primary and secondary legal materials are analyzed deductively and qualitatively to systematically answer the problem formulation. Results: The results of the study indicate that (1) the dissemination of radical ideology through social media can be classified as a criminal offense under Article 28 paragraph (2) in conjunction with Article 45A paragraph (2) of the ITE Law, as well as Articles 160 and 107 of the Criminal Code concerning incitement and treason; and (2) in the a quo decision, the application of criminal law is carried out textually but does not consider the ideological context and social impact of the disseminated content. This raises concerns about the potential for multiple interpretations and misuse of the hate speech articles. Conclusion: Decision Number 240/Pid.Sus/2020/PN Cbn indicates that although the legal elements are met, the judge has not comprehensively considered the sociological aspects and constitutional interpretation of hate speech norms. Therefore, official interpretive guidelines and a more contextual approach to law enforcement are needed to ensure they do not deviate from the principles of justice and freedom of expression in a democratic state governed by the rule of law. Keywords: Crime, Radicalism, Social Media