Purpose: The main problems in this thesis are 1) How is the construction of narcotics crimes committed by military personnel reviewed from the legal and criminological aspects? 2) What is the background to the occurrence of narcotics crimes imposed by judges to impose penalties in their decisions? Research/methodology: The research method in this thesis uses a normative legal research type with a descriptive analytical research nature. The data used in this thesis is secondary data supported by data from interviews. The analysis is carried out qualitatively and conclusions are drawn deductively. Results: Based on the results of the research and discussion, it was concluded that the construction of the occurrence of Narcotics Crimes committed by military personnel was seen from the legal aspect, namely taken from three military court decisions and each decision was described so as to know what was behind not being dismissed from military service,  also seen from the criminological aspect, namely the Rational Choice Theory (RCT). Humans are free to choose their behavior, whether to obey or violate, based on rational considerations, these theories are supported by legal process data and the results of the resource person's answers. For Military Judges, they should provide stricter sanctions against narcotics perpetrators committed by military personnel, in order to provide a more deterrent effect on the perpetrators and be a lesson for other military personnel and change the negative public view of the Indonesian National Army.

Purpose: This study aims to analyze the Juridical Position of Laboratory Results in Proving Narcotics Crimes in the Military Environment (Juridical Review in Decision Number 12-K/PMT-II/AU/V/2021). Research/methodology: This research is a type of normative juridical research,  the data analysis in this thesis research is descriptive analytical. Results: It is associated with the position of laboratory results as evidence that should be very absolute and very strong because it cannot be disputed because the laboratory results are the results of measurement and weighing, because something measured that is weighed contains certainty rather than just a statement, because it is impossible for people to know the content of blood, the urine contains narcotics if you only look at urine and blood. So in this case, the laboratory results are very strong compared to witness statements and witnesses in general. According to the Minutes of the Criminal Laboratory Examination No. LAB 5743/NNF/2020 dated December 3, 2020, Evidence No. 3312/2020/NF to 3316/2020/NF,- in the form of cups, plastic clips, plastic bottles with straws, plastic bottle caps with straws and aluminum foil containing methamphetamine. The author argues that a negative urine test result as the only evidence is not enough to acquit the defendant of all charges, the judge must consider all the evidence presented and the decision must be based on a minimum of two valid evidence. If there is no other evidence sufficient to support the charges, the defendant can be acquitted, but if there is other strong evidence, the defendant can still be found guilty even if the urine test is negative.