Dr. Amiek Soemarmi, S.H., M.Hum. is a lecturer at the Faculty of Law, Diponegoro University (Undip) in the area of expertise in Constitutional Law. Her scientific writings regarding cases of fishing by foreign fishermen, where originating from Vietnam constituted the largest number of fishing in the Indonesian Waters Territory were handled by the Pontianak Fisheries Court.
Her scientific study of “Discretion and Disparities in Decisions of Fisheries Court Judges (A Constructivism Paradigm Study)” discussed the process of applying discretion in decisions of fisheries court judges, the relationship between discretion and disparities in decisions of fisheries court judges, and the contribution of the study of the constructivism paradigm to understanding the relationship between discretion and disparities in decisions of fisheries court judges.
“Judges in deciding cases will consider statutory texts that are relevant to the main points of the case to the values of life beliefs in society. Fisheries court judges in giving decisions are often faced with laws and regulations that provide choices, do not regulate, are incomplete, or are unclear,” she explained.
Furthermore, Dr. Amiek said the disparities in judges’ decisions was the result of a long process of discretion. The results of the study based on the five decisions of the Pontianak fisheries court judges against fishing crimes committed by Vietnamese citizens, it was found that an independent judicial process had produced court products that contained legal considerations and became an illustration of the court’s authority, the enactment of regulations governing fishing business activities gives rise to discretion, and this can lead to disparities in judge’s decisions. Through the study of the constructivism paradigm, considerations can be obtained of how light and severe the criminal provisions imposed are as well as the relationship between the judge’s decision and the paradigm he believes in.
“The difference in decisions is motivated by the paradigm adopted by a judge. Therefore, the paradigm of judges is related to and mutually influences the discretionary process before the case is decided, which in turn can lead to disparities in the judge’s decision,” she concluded. (Lin/As – Public Relations)