Claim Missing Document
Check
Articles

Found 2 Documents
Search

Analisis Yuridis Terhadap Diferensiasi Pertanggungjawaban Pidana Dalam Kasus Penganiayaan Yang Dilakukan Secara Bersama-Sama Tiara Okta Yanti; Aldi Prasetiawan Saputra; Dea Eryan Ananda; Muhammad Armada; Dwi Putri Lestarika
Jurnal Kajian Hukum dan Pendidikan Kewarganegaraan Vol. 2 No. 1 (2025): Oktober - Desember
Publisher : GLOBAL SCIENTS PUBLISHER

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar

Abstract

The application of differentiated criminal liability by investigators in handling collective assault cases represents the implementation of justice and individualization principles in Indonesia’s criminal law system. This principle requires that each offender be held accountable according to their level of culpability, intent, and contribution to the offense. Juridically, the legal basis for applying this differentiation lies in Articles 55 and 56 of the Indonesian Criminal Code (KUHP) concerning participation, Article 170 KUHP concerning group assault, and Articles 1(2) and 7(1)(a) of the Criminal Procedure Code (KUHAP), which authorize investigators to assess and determine the role of each participant. Additionally, this principle is grounded in the constitutional guarantee of justice under Article 28D(1) of the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia and the principle of proportionality as stipulated in National Police Regulation No. 6 of 2019 on Criminal Investigation. Through the implementation of differentiated criminal liability, investigators are expected to uphold law enforcement that is fair, professional, and proportional thus preventing over-criminalization and ensuring substantive justice for all individuals involved in joint assault crimes.
Telaah Normatif Kedudukan Dan Kekuatan Pembuktian Tes Deoxyribonucleic Acid Sebagai Alat Bukti Sah Dalam Sistem Pembuktian Hukum Pidana Nasional Syadid Jiddan Alharun; Tiara Ramadhani; Aldi Prasetiawan Saputra; Aulia Rexana Sitaresmi; Ria Anggraeni Utami
Jurnal Kajian Hukum Dan Kebijakan Publik | E-ISSN : 3031-8882 Vol. 3 No. 1 (2025): Juli - Desember
Publisher : CV. ITTC INDONESIA

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.62379/c942fe67

Abstract

This research normatively analyzes the position and probative value of Deoxyribonucleic Acid (DNA) Testing within the Indonesian criminal procedure law system. The underlying legal issue is the controversy surrounding DNA testing to establish the validity of a biological child, particularly when linked to specific criminal acts such as adultery or defamation. The method employed is juridical-normative, using a statutory approach and a conceptual approach, focusing on a comprehensive review of Law Number 8 of 1981 concerning the Criminal Procedure Code (KUHAP) and related criminal provisions. The analysis of Article 184 paragraph (1) of KUHAP indicates that DNA Testing is not explicitly recognized as an evidence, yet it can be categorized as part of Expert Testimony or Documentary Evidence (Visum et Repertum). The probative force of DNA Testing is absolute in determining biological relationships, but within the criminal context, it must comply with the principle of minimum two valid evidence and be supported by the judge's conviction as stipulated in Article 183 of KUHAP. This research concludes that regulatory harmonization is necessary to provide a more specific and stronger standing for DNA Testing, especially in cases involving the determination of identity or biological relationships.