The Criminal Act of Dissemination of Fake News via Social Media in the Perspective of Individualization of Criminal

This study focuses on 2 (two) main issues. First, how is the judge's decision considered based on the perspective of individualization of punishment? The second main issue is the factors that influence the judge's decision based on the perspective of individualization of punishment for the crime of spreading false news through social media. The implementation of the perspective of individualization of punishment in the Decision of the Jayapura Class IA District Court Number 16/Pid.B/2020/PN Jap is implied in 6 (six) main points of the judge's consideration, namely (1) the indictment and criminal charges of the Public Prosecutor, (2) the defense of the Legal Counsel, (3) evidence in the form of witness statements, both charge witnesses and a de charge witnesses, expert statements, defendant statements, (4) evidence, (5) trial facts, (6) proof of elements of the crime of spreading false news through social media. In addition, 5 (five) factors influence the decision, namely (1) the condition of the perpetrator, (2) the motive of the perpetrator, (3) the impact of the crime committed, (4) the form of the perpetrator's mistake, (5) the purpose of the punishment. Thus, the judicial freedom of judges does not mean that judges abandon the perspective of individualization of punishment this perspective of individualization of punishment provides direction for judges in constructing decisions on criminal cases of spreading fake news through social media, which is fully supported by at least 2 (two) pieces of evidence and the judge's legal conviction (juridische overtuigingen).