scholarly journals Asas Unus Testis Nullus Testis dalam Tindak Pidana Pemerkosaan Anak

2021 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 191-195
Author(s):  
NI MADE YULIA CHITTA DEWI ◽  
A.A. Sagung Laksmi Dewi ◽  
Luh Putu Suryani
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
The Other ◽  
Conceptual Approach ◽  
Witness Testimony ◽  
Normative Approach ◽  
Criminal Procedure Law ◽  
Valid Evidence

Proving a rape crime against children shall have valid evidences. The proof aims to find the truth material in order to prove whether the perpetrator was guilty or not. Even though in  proving a  rape crime, the  judges considered that there is  only one valid testimony from the witness yet the other evidences are not support it, it is clear that it would be considered by the judges which could effected the judge’s decision. There are two issues that will be discussed in this thesis, firstly regarding the unus testis nulus testis principle in rape criminals of children and the proof of rape crime against children by using one witness (unus testis nullus testis). The methods of this research used are normative approach and conceptual approach. The witness’ testimony in the hearing process is the main evidence as the judge’s considerations. In the criminal procedure law, the evidentiary process is required by means of presenting witnesses and by the support of other evidence. Regarding of this rape crime against children, besides using testimony from the witness, it is necessary to support other evidence such as the results of visum et repertum which is useful to prove that a crime has occurred. When there only one valid testimony from the witness, it must be followed by other valid evidence to strengthen the witness’s statement. Therefore, if there is only have one supported witness’s testimony to prove a rape crime against children it could not prove the criminal was occur.    

scholarly journals Keterangan Saksi dengan Gangguan Jiwa Sebagai Alat Bukti di Pengadilan

2021 ◽  
Vol 4 (5) ◽  
pp. 1937
Author(s):  
Put Fui Syafira Basuki
Keyword(s):  
Mental Illness ◽  
Mental Disorder ◽  
Memory Loss ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Conceptual Approach ◽  
Witness Testimony ◽  
Legal Requirement ◽  
Legal Evidence ◽  
Procedure Code ◽  
Valid Evidence

AbstractWitness testimony is evidence tool in the first sequence in the Criminal Procedure Code (KUHAP) so it can be said there is no criminal case which escapes from the proof of witness testimony. The legal requirement for a witness's statement is when a witness takes an oath. However, in article 171 letter b of the Criminal Procedure Code (KUHAP) states that a person may give testimony without swearing, that is, a person who has memory loss or mental illness, although sometimes his memory is back. In psychology is referred to psychopaat, but the information given cannot be justified perfectly and his information is only used as a guide or additional legal evidence tool as long as it is compatible with legal evidence tool. This study uses the typology of doctrinal research with a legislation approach, conceptual approach, and case approach. Witness testimony given without the oath is considered not a valid evidence but is used as an adjunct to perfect the strength of legal evidence tool because it can strengthen the judge's conviction.Keywords: Evidence Tool; Witnesses; Mental Disorder; Responsibility.AbstrakKeterangan saksi merupakan alat bukti pada urutan pertama dalam KUHAP sehingga dapat dikatakan bahwa tiada suatu perkara pidana yang luput dari pembuktian keterangan saksi. Syarat sah keterangan saksi adalah ketika seorang saksi mengucapkan sumpah. Namun pada pasal 171 huruf b KUHAP menyatakan bahwa seseorang boleh memberikan keterangan tanpa sumpah yaitu orang yang mengalami sakit ingatan atau sakit jiwa meskipun kadang-kadang ingatannya kembali dalam ilmu penyakit jiwa disebut dengan psychopaat, tetapi keterangan yang diberikan tidak dapat dipertanggungjawabkan secara sempurna dan keterangannya hanya dipakai sebagai petunjuk atau tambahan alat bukti sah asalkan berkesuaian dengan alat bukti sah. Penelitian ini menggunakan tipologi penelitian doktrinal dengan pendekatan perundang-undangan, pendekatan konseptual, dan pendekatan kasus. Keterangan saksi yang diberikan tanpa sumpah dinilai bukan merupakan alat bukti yang sah namun digunakan sebagai tambahan untuk menyempurnakan kekuatan pembuktian alat bukti yang sah karena dapat menguatkan keyakinan hakim.Kata Kunci: Alat Bukti; Saksi; Gangguan Jiwa; Tanggungjawab.

scholarly journals One view on the position of crime victim in criminal procedure for organized crime

Temida ◽  
2004 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
pp. 17-29
Author(s):  
Milan Skulic
Keyword(s):  
Organized Crime ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Crime Victim ◽  
Witness Testimony ◽  
Special Regard ◽  
Legislative Body ◽  
Basic Rights ◽  
Criminal Procedure Law ◽  
Specific Position

In this paper the position of victim in criminal procedure for organized crime is analyzed. Through recent changes of our criminal procedure law, the special type of procedure is created in relation to organized crime, with inclusion of large number of specific criminal procedure norms. These new solutions contribute to the protection of victims/witnesses, although there are still more space for the improvement. Legislative body still needs to overcome deeply embedded attitude that the witnesses and victims are the exclusive source of evidence, or, in other words, that the witness testimony is only way to find out evidence information. The victim has to be treated at the first place as a person to whom specific position in criminal procedure, with special regard on the protection of her basic rights, should be guaranteed.

scholarly journals The Concepts of Truth and Fairness in Thai Criminal Procedure

2021 ◽  
Vol 24 (1) ◽  
pp. 59-89
Author(s):  
Alexandre Chitov
Keyword(s):  
Legal Education ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Procedural Fairness ◽  
The Other ◽  
Judicial Discretion ◽  
Legal Norms ◽  
Criminal Procedure Law ◽  
The One ◽  
The Right ◽  
Procedural Rights

This study looks at the principles that shape the structure of the whole of Thai criminal procedure law. It examines how the search for truth is attempted to be reconciled with the idea of a fair trial or procedural fairness. The conflict between the search for truth on the one hand and guaranteeing procedural rights of the accused on the other is particularly problematic in the Thai context. Thai law affirms that some evidence cannot be admissible if it is obtained by a violation of certain procedural norms. At the same time, the law allows judges to admit some unlawfully obtained evidence in the interest of justice. The conflict between various legal norms cannot be solved without permitting judges to exercise broad discretion in striking the right balance between discovering the true facts and protecting the rights of the accused. Thai legal education and practice does not allow a broad judicial discretion in accepting or rejecting evidence on the grounds that it was obtained unlawfully. As a result, there is an attempt to build a sophisticated system of rules to accommodate the interests of justice and fairness in different situations. This system, however, lacks clarity and consistency.

scholarly journals Legalitas Rekaman Circuit Closed Television (CCTV) Dalam Proses Pembuktian di Persidangan

2018 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
pp. 36
Author(s):  
Ida Bagus Gede Angga Juniarta
Keyword(s):  
Information Technology ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
The Other ◽  
Electronic Records ◽  
Electronic Information ◽  
Judicial Process ◽  
Strength Of Evidence ◽  
Positive Law ◽  
Procedure Code ◽  
Valid Evidence

One part of the judicial process is verifying evidence for searching the material truth of case to assist judges in making decisions. One aid that can be used in verification the evidence during the trial is the Information Technology in the form of Circuit Closed Television (CCTV) footage because it is not regulated in the positive Law in Indonesia. Because of that, in this research are used a normative method to answer the problem with the approach of legislation and approach to the concept. The legal arrangement of CCTV footage as evidence in Act No. 8 of 1981 on the Law of Criminal Procedure Code is not exist, because the Criminal Procedure Code are setting a limited valid evidence under the Act, but for the interest of seeking the material truth, then there makes Act No. 11 of 2008 on Information and Electronic Transaction which govern the other evidence in the form of Electronic Information and/or Electronic Records. The strength of evidence from CCTV footage has not been expressly provided in Act No. 11 of 2008 on ITE, so that the strength of evidence is still exempt, which means that the strength of evidence is still based on the judge’s conviction. Salah satu bagian dalam proses peradilan yakni adanya proses pembuktian guna mencari kebenaran materiil dari suatu perkara guna membantu hakim dalam mengambil keputusan. Salah satu bantuan yang dapat digunakan dalam pembuktian di persidangan adalah teknologi informasi yang berbentuk rekaman CCTV, tetapi dalam persidangan dipertanyakan akan kekuatan pembuktian dari rekaman CCTV tersebut, karena tidak diatur dalam hukum positif di Indonesia. Penelitian ini mempergunakan metode penelitian normatif untuk menjawab permasalahan tersebut dengan pendekatan perundang-undangan dan pendekatan konsep. Pengaturan rekaman CCTV sebagai alat bukti ini dalam Undang-Undang Nomor 8 Tahun 1981 tentang Kitab Undang-Undang Hukum Acara Pidana (selanjutnya disebut KUHAP) tidak ditemukan pengaturannya, karena KUHAP mengatur secara limitatif alat bukti yang sah menurut Undang-Undang. Demi kepentingan mencari kebenaran materiil maka dibentuklah Undang-Undang Nomor 11 Tahun 2008 tentang Informasi dan Transaksi Elektronik yang mengatur tentang alat bukti lain berupa informasi elektronik dan/atau dokumen elektronik. Kekuatan pembuktian dari rekaman CCTV belum diatur dalam Undang-Undang Nomor 11 Tahun 2008 tentang ITE, sehingga pembuktiannya masih bersifat bebas, yang artinya kekuatan pembuktian dari alat bukti tersebut masih berdasarkan atas keyakinan hakim.

scholarly journals Relevansi Pemeriksaan Calon Tersangka sebelum Penetapan Tersangka

2020 ◽  
Vol 3 (2) ◽  
pp. 267-288
Author(s):  
Erdianto Effendi
Keyword(s):  
Expert Testimony ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Witness Testimony ◽  
Criminal Procedure Law

In Indonesian criminal procedure law, there is no requirement for an investigator to first conduct an examination of a potential suspect until the determination as a suspect. The determination of a suspect is deemed sufficiently reasonable if it is based on examination of evidence, ranging from witness testimony, expert testimony, document and other evidence. After the Decision of the Constitutional Court Number 21/PUU-XII/2014, there were differences in interpretation and debate regarding the examination of the potential suspect, because this examination was mentioned in the consideration of the decision as a necessity but not part of the verdict. In this article, it is revealed that the designation of a person as a suspect is part of forced efforts and is almost equivalent to the designation of a person as a convicted person due to the similarities in the various restrictions and deprivation of rights that can be applied as a result of the two determinations, for example in detention. The shift in the meaning of the determination of a suspect as part of this forced effort encourages that citizens’ rights be protected not only when a person is a suspect, but also before becoming a suspect. Thus, the rights inherent in a suspects also needs to be given to those who will be designated as suspects, also called as potential suspects. Abstrak Dalam hukum acara pidana Indonesia, tidak ada keharusan bagi penyidik untuk terlebih dahulu melakukan pemeriksaan calon tersangka sehingga sampai pada penetapannya sebagai tersangka. Penetapan tersangka dipandang telah cukup beralasan apabila didasarkan pada pemeriksaan alat bukti, mulai dari keterangan saksi, keterangan ahli, surat, dan bukti lainnya. Pasca Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor 21/PUU-XII/2014, terjadi perbedaan penafsiran dan perdebatan tentang pemeriksaan calon tersangka ini, disebabkan pemeriksaan ini disebut dalam bagian pertimbangan putusan sebagai suatu keharusan namun tidak menjadi bagian amar putusan. Dalam artikel ini ditunjukkan, penetapan seseorang sebagai tersangka merupakan bagian dari upaya paksa dan bahkan hampir setara dengan penetapan seseorang sebagai terpidana, disebabkan kesamaan berbagai pembatasan dan perampasan hak yang dapat diterapkan akibat dari dua penetapan tersebut, misalnya dalam penahanan. Perubahan pemaknaan penetapan tersangka sebagai bagian dari upaya paksa ini mendorong agar hak-hak warga negara telah harus dilindungi tidak saja ketika seseorang sudah berstatus tersangka, tetapi juga pada saat sebelum menjadi tersangka. Dengan demikian, hak-hak yang melekat dalam diri tersangka juga perlu diberikan kepada mereka yang akan ditetapkan sebagai tersangka, atau disebut calon tersangka.

scholarly journals BUKTI ELEKTRONIK SEBAGAI ALAT BUKTI YANG SAH DALAM HUKUM ACARA PIDANA

2017 ◽  
Vol 6 (3) ◽  
pp. 463
Author(s):  
Ramiyanto Ramiyanto
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Independent Evidence ◽  
Electronic Evidence ◽  
Procedure Code ◽  
Criminal Offenses ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Criminal Procedure Law ◽  
Functional Equivalent ◽  
Valid Evidence ◽  
Admissible Evidence

The Criminal Procedure Code as a general criminal procedure does not recognize electronic evidence as one of the admissible types of evidence. In practice, electronic evidence is also used as an admissible evidence to prove the criminal offenses in court. From the results of the discussion it can be concluded that electronic evidence in criminal procedure law is a dependent evidence and an independent evidence (substitution of letter proof if it meets the principle of functional equivalent approach and expansion of evidence) as specified in several special laws and instruments issued by the Supreme Court. The electronic evidence is not regulated in the Criminal Procedure Code as a lex generalis, however, to achieve material truth it can also be used as a valid evidence for the provision of all types of criminal offenses in court. It is based on recognition in the practice of criminal justice, some special laws, and instruments issued by the Supreme Court.Keywords: electronic evidence, admissible evidence, criminal procedure code, proof

scholarly journals Noziedzīgi iegūtas mantas institūta tiesiskais regulējums Latvijas Republikā starpkaru periodā

2021 ◽  
pp. 364-369
Author(s):  
Daira Sergejeva
Keyword(s):  
Interwar Period ◽  
Basic Principle ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
The Other ◽  
Other Hand ◽  
Criminal Procedure Law ◽  
Third Person ◽  
The Republic ◽  
The Right ◽  
Insight Into

This article provides an insight into the basic principle of the Institute of Criminally Acquired Property during the interwar period in the Republic of Latvia. It is important to mention that nowadays, until the amendments of March 4, 2021 to Section 360 of the Criminal Procedure Law was adopted, if criminally acquired property has been found on a third person and criminally acquired property has been returned to the owner or lawful possessor thereof, a third person was only entitled to compensation. On the other hand, upon the entry into force of the amendments to Section 360 of the Criminal Procedure Law, a third person, similarly to the interwar period, in exceptional cases also has the right to property that has been recognized as criminally acquired.

scholarly journals Judicial Review of PPAT Calls According to the Criminal Justice System

2019 ◽  
Vol 6 (3) ◽  
pp. 885
Author(s):  
M. Reza Sudarji Famaldika ◽  
Rodliyah Rodliyah ◽  
M. Natsir
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Criminal Justice System ◽  
Justice System ◽  
Legal Protection ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
District Court ◽  
Legal Research ◽  
Conceptual Approach ◽  
Legal Provisions ◽  
Criminal Procedure Law

The purpose of this research is to know, understand, and analyze the calling of PPAT according to criminal justice system related to protection aspect and form of legal responsibility.This research method uses normative law research type. Normative legal research is a legal research that lays law as a norm system building. The norm system is about principles, norms, and rules, rules of law, court decisions, agreements and doctrines (teachings). Using the approach method: Statutory Approach, Case Approach, and Conceptual Approach. Normative procedure research results in the calling of PPAT as a witness or suspect are imposed by Article 112 of the Criminal Procedure Code while the seizure of the original deed of PPAT (minuta) and warkah can only be done with the special permission of the Chairman of the local District Court under the provisions of Article 43 of the Book Invite Criminal Procedure Law. PPAT as a Public Officer in carrying out his / her position should have special legal protection to keep the honor and dignity of his / her position including when giving testimony and information in examination and trial. Notary and PPAT positions have similarity in carrying out its duty of making an authentic deed based on the wishes of the parties. The calling of a notary in the criminal justice system has a provision which must be followed as the provisions of Article 66 Paragraph (1) of the Law on Notary Call for the interest of the criminal proceeding process shall obtain the approval of the Notary Public Council while the invitation to the PPAT office shall have the legal provisions in general not having legal protection set specifically.

CONCEPT AND CONTENT OF A RECONCILIATION AGREEMENT IN THE CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS OF UKRAINE

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mariia Sirotkina ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Main Attention ◽  
Criminal Offense ◽  
Procedural Law ◽  
Legal Nature ◽  
Criminal Procedure Law ◽  
The Subject ◽  
Definition Of

The article is turned out to a scientific search for the concept of "a reconciliation agreement between the victim and the suspect or accused" through the study of the essence of reconciliation and role in criminal proceedings thereof. The author notes that criminal procedural law (until 2012) had been proclaimed another approach to reconciliation between victim and suspect, not involved a dispute procedure as a conflict, the result of which can be reached by compromise and understanding through reconciliation. It is stated that one of the ways to resolve the legal conflict in committing a criminal offense was the opportunity to reach a compromise between the victim and the suspect (the accused) by concluding a reconciliation agreement between them, provided by the Code of Сriminal Procedure of Ukraine (2012). The main attention is placed on the shortcoming of the domestic criminal procedure law which is the lack of the concept of "a reconciliation agreement between the victim and the suspect or the accused", which can be eliminated only through examining the essence or legal nature of reconciliation in criminal proceedings. Taking into consideration the current legislation and modern views on the institution of reconciliation in criminal proceedings, the author's definition of the concept of "a reconciliation agreement" is proposed. Thus, “The conciliation agreement is an agreement in criminal proceedings concluded between the victim and the suspect or the accused person on their own initiative in relation to crimes of minor or medium gravity and in criminal proceedings in the form of private prosecution, the subject of which is the compensation of harm caused by wrongdoing or committing other actions not related to compensation for the damage that the suspect or the accused is obliged to commit in favor of the victim, in exchange for an agreed punishment and sentencing thereof or sentencing thereof and relief from serving a sentence with probation, as well as the statutory consequences of conclusion and approval of the agreement".

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document