UNDERSTANDING UNDERSTANDING THE JUDGE'S DECISIONS WHICH ARE BEST FOR CHILDREN TO REALIZE JUSTICE FOR ALL POST DIVERSION FAILURE

Diversion is unique, because it not only seeks not to punish children who are in conflict with the law, but must pay attention to the interests of victims, the welfare and responsibility of children, avoidance of retaliation, harmonization of society; and propriety, decency and public order. If diversion fails, it should not be interpreted as the end of providing the best for the child. The opportunity for this will still exist when a child undergoes a formal criminal legal process in the District Court. Along with this, the problem in this research is how to understand the judge's decision which leads to the best interests of the child after failed diversion, Based on the decision of the Cirebon District Court Number 24/Pid.Sus-Anak/2021/PN Cbn, while remaining in the corridor of justice for all. This research aims to understand and analyze the judge's decision which focuses on the best interests of the child after failed diversion, Based on the decision of the Cirebon District Court Number 24/Pid.Sus-Anak/2021/PN Cbn, while remaining within the corridor of justice for all. This research is normative legal research. The object studied is the judge's decision. The data used is secondary data. Data collection techniques were carried out using literature study. The analysis was carried out qualitatively and presented in descriptive form. The research results show, based on the decision of the Cirebon District Court Number 24/Pid.Sus-Anak/2021/PN Cbn, three children from Cirebon, respectively Rizki Maulana Bin Chaerudin aged 14 years, Ari Danuri Bin Sanur Wenda aged 14 years and Muhammad Qolbin Bin Salim Dzikir Alias Zikri, aged 16 years, was sentenced to the crime of Guidance at the Social Institution for the Rehabilitation of Children in Conflict with the Law (PSRABH) Cileungsi Bogor for 2 (two) years each and Job Training for 3 (three) years each. month. These children are hereinafter referred to as Child I, Child II and Child III. To assess whether a child's punishment is in accordance with SPPA principles or not, does not start when the judge makes a decision. This assessment should start by looking at the actions that have been carried out by Child I, Child II and Child III , which are an inseparable part of the judge's decision. For example, the type of crime/ criminal act that has been committed by the child, the way the child commits the crime/criminal act (modus operandi), the consequences of the crime/criminal act, and the attitude of the parties who are legalized by law to contribute to the juvenile justice process. , and the basis of the judge's considerations in the decision. The conclusion of this research is that understanding the judge's decision for children who are in conflict with the law which leads to the best interests of the child, while remaining within the corridor of justice for all is a decision that takes into account the survival and growth and development of the child which is the most basic human right for children which is protected by the state, government, society, family and parents.