<![CDATA[The judges' verdict criminal cases narcotics in the sentenced criminal special minimum District Court Pekanbaru background research , narcotics in violation of Law No. 35 Year 2009 on Narcotics , judges convict to the minimum penalty specifically with Article 127 paragraph ( 1 ) letter a is 2 years in prison . The judge gives a decision against the defendant narcotic crime away from the threat of the minimum set by law . In this case the judges tend to think in terms of moral judgment and is based with factual evidence or rational argument . Not like the flow of legal positivism . Where the flow of legal positivism is a way of thinking that is just under the Act . From the research problem there are two things that can be inferred . First, the verdict is essentially a work of finding the law , which stipulates what should be according to the law in any event concerning life in a state of law . If it is associated with Positivism Legal positivism where the essence of the law is that the law is a command. At the time of this verdict the judge considered to be true because it is still in accordance with the legislation . Second, the imposition of a special minimum punishment in sentencing purposes deemed not appropriate . Because of the special minimum criminal punishment only see things any mitigating for the accused and it is enough to provide justice for defendants not to provide a deterrent effect or retaliation against crimes that have been committed by the perpetrator.Keywords : Basic Considerations - Judge - Narcotics - Minimum Special Criminal - Legal Positivism]]>
