<![CDATA[Abstract This study analyzes the strength and assessment of evidence in the Pontianak High Court's Acquittal Decision Number 464/PID.SUS/2024/PT PTK related to the case of illegal mining. The study focuses on the application of the provisions of evidence as stipulated in Articles 183, 184, and 188 of the Criminal Procedure Code (KUHAP), particularly in assessing the connection between witness testimony, expert testimony, documentary evidence, electronic evidence, clues, and the defendant's testimony.The research method used is normative legal research with a legislative, conceptual, and court decision analysis approach. The results of the study show that the Pontianak High Court Judges assessed the evidence partially and not as a series of interrelated evidence, thereby obscuring the cumulative evidentiary strength that should have formed the judges' conviction. In fact, the evidence submitted by the Public Prosecutor as a whole showed the existence of unlicensed mining activities, the defendant's role as the controller of the activities, the absence of RKAB approval, and significant economic and environmental impacts. This study concludes that the acquittal reflects an error in the application of the law of evidence and has the potential to hinder the achievement of substantive justice in the enforcement of criminal law in the field of mining. Kata kunci: Legal Review, Acquittal, Illegal Mining, Strength of Evidence Abstrak Penelitian ini menganalisis kekuatan dan penilaian alat bukti dalam Putusan Bebas Pengadilan Tinggi Pontianak Nomor 464/PID.SUS/2024/PT PTK terkait perkara penambangan tanpa izin. Fokus kajian diarahkan pada penerapan ketentuan pembuktian sebagaimana diatur dalam Pasal 183, Pasal 184, dan Pasal 188 Kitab Undang-Undang Hukum Acara Pidana (KUHAP), khususnya dalam menilai keterkaitan antara keterangan saksi, keterangan ahli, alat bukti surat, alat bukti elektronik, petunjuk, dan keterangan terdakwa. Metode penelitian yang digunakan adalah penelitian hukum normatif dengan pendekatan perundang-undangan, konseptual, dan analisis putusan pengadilan. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa Majelis Hakim Tinggi Pontianak menilai alat bukti secara parsial dan tidak sebagai satu rangkaian pembuktian yang saling berkaitan, sehingga mengaburkan kekuatan pembuktian kumulatif yang seharusnya membentuk keyakinan hakim. Padahal, secara keseluruhan alat bukti yang diajukan Penuntut Umum telah menunjukkan adanya aktivitas penambangan tanpa izin, peran terdakwa sebagai pengendali kegiatan, ketiadaan persetujuan RKAB, serta dampak ekonomi dan lingkungan yang signifikan. Penelitian ini menyimpulkan bahwa putusan bebas a quo mencerminkan kekeliruan dalam penerapan hukum pembuktian dan berpotensi menghambat pencapaian keadilan substantif dalam penegakan hukum pidana di bidang pertambangan. Kata kunci: Tinjauan Yuridis, Putusan Bebas, Penambangan tanpa izin, Kekuatan Alat Bukti]]>
Copyrights © 2025
