Claim Missing Document
Check
Articles

Found 1 Documents
Search
Journal : JUSTISI

The Legal Status of Circumstantial Evidence in the Context of Criminal Cases in Indonesia Hari Wibowo; Dodi Jaya Wardana; Levina Yustitianingtyas; Hasnan Bachtiar
JUSTISI Vol. 10 No. 3 (2024): JUSTISI
Publisher : Fakultas Hukum Universitas Muhammadiyah Sorong

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.33506/js.v10i3.3307

Abstract

In practice, there are several instances of criminal decisions that are not in accordance with the law. In such instances, the judge interprets the law or legal findings based on circumstantial evidence. As a result, the action taken does not achieve the highest degree of justice and legal certainty in a decision. This is because the decision is not based on the minimum requirements of two pieces of evidence that must be met in terms of evidence to impose a sentence. The objective of this research was to analyze the legal status of circumstantial evidence in the context of criminal cases. Our research findings indicate that the philosophy of circumstantial evidence, as it pertains to criminal procedural law, represents a form of evidence that can be considered by judges in relation to the absence of facts that are not directly visible by eyewitnesses. This evidence is intended to provide a comprehensive depiction of the truth of an event, thereby facilitating the acceptance of a reasonable account of events. Establishing circumstantial evidence is distinct from providing instructions, however. To do so, one must obtain clues from facts presented at trial in the form of witness statements, letters and statements of the accused. The ius constituendum application of circumstantial evidence in the process of proving a criminal case is to provide the judge with the authority to utilise circumstantial evidence in the process of proving a crime as an additional legal means of evidence in sentencing. The role of indirect evidence in the imposition of criminal penalties is a doctrine that is confined to be the domain of legal experts.
Co-Authors Ade Irma Suryani Aini, Assuratul Alifiyah Fitrah Rahmadhani Althofurrahman, Muhammad Belva Ameliani, Putri Andi Rahmad Rahim Anis Mashdurohatun Anisa Tri Ariyanti Anita Handayani Arya Maulana P.P Astari P, Enggar Windi Aziz, Kemas Abdul Damar Gondo Arwono Dito Kurniawan, Dito Edy Safitri Eka Nurjanah EL Aisy, Nandina Fadlulloh, Muhammad Dito Fahmi Idris Fahrul Ramdan Suwandi Fauzia, Ana Fidinansyah, Muhammad Iqbal Fresil Nurassyafa Almayunda Guruh Wicahyo Prabowo Hapsari, Iffahdah Pratama Hardian Iskandar Hari Wibowo Hariani, Rahmania Nur Hasnan Bachtiar Idris, Fahmi Ifahda Pratama Hapsari Ikhzami, Albi Ira Ayu Widianti Irsyada, Nadia Elza Ismail, Subiyanto Janah, Eka Nur Khafidah Khafidah Khastama, Iqbal Kiki Andrian Levina Yustitianingtyas Lulut Sulistiono Maradona Maradona Maulana P, Arya Moch Rizky Giri Moh. Rafiqi Luthfi Rahman Mohamed, Muhammad Azimuddin Muhammad Azkannasabi Muhammad Belva Althofurrahman Muhammad Ilham Rizaldi Muhammad Roqib muhammad roqib, muhammad Mulyasari, Septy Dwi Diantika Nadia Prawira Supriadi Noer Rakhanaufal, Yusuf Nur Fauziyah Pratama Hapsari, Ifahda Putri, Fresiella ‘Arsy Mahdavika Radian Salman Radya, Kenya Nayaka Rahmadhani, Alifiyah Fitrah Rahmat Agus Santoso Rahmayani, Ima Ridho Afrizal Abd Rohim Rizkyfia Desya Anindyta Sakha, Raihan Putra Sania Puspita Anggraini Sari, Anggun Purnama Septiana, Lia Nadella Setiyawan, Deni Sukardi . Sukardi Sukardi Sukardi Sukardi Sukaris Sulistiono, Lulut Suri Oktavian Toetik Rahayuningsih Virgianty Febri Wulandari Yan Ubaidilah Muttaqin Zulvikar, Muhammad Vicki