synchronization of prosecutors to the implementation of work training asinstitution of criminal fine for children in decision of state court number 30 /pid.sus-children / 2016 / pn

The purpose of writing this article is to synchronize prosecutors' arrangements for theimplementation of job training as a substitute for criminal fines for children in the bangil district courtdecision number 30 / pid.sus-anak / 2016 / pn.bil. the study method uses a statutory approach (statueapproach), a case approach. children are an inseparable part of the sustainability of human life and thesustainability of a nation and state. the presence of law no. 11 of 2012 concerning the criminal justicesystem for children (uu sppa) as a substitute for law no. 3 of 1997 concerning juvenile courts(uupa), one of the substances that is regulated is the placement of children who undergo a judicialprocess to be placed in the special development institution for children (lpka). bangil court decisionnumber 30 / pid.sus-anak / 2016 / pn.bil, that is, there has been a criminal act of intercourse against aminor in pasuruan regency which was committed by the defendant, namely a child who was still a minor.in the letter of the public prosecutor's demands at the pasuruan district district attorney, it states thatimposing a sentence against the defendant with imprisonment of 04 (four) years is reduced as long as thedefendant is in detention on the order of the defendant to remain in detention, and fines that are not paidare replaced with job training at a vocational training center. pasuruan for 03 (three) months. whereasin the decision of the bangil district court number 30 / pid.sus-anak / 2016 / pn.bil, namely imposinga sentence against the defendant with imprisonment of 02 (two) years and 02 (two) months, and fines thatare not paid are mandatory job training at the vocational training center for 01 (one) month.