Abstract
Indonesia regulates its criminal proof system in the Indonesian Criminal Procedure Code, while China governs its proof system under the Criminal Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China. Although both Indonesia and China follow a Civil Law system, there are similarities and differences in their criminal proof systems. This study employs a normative legal research approach with a descriptive-analytical nature, utilizing secondary data analyzed qualitatively and drawing deductive conclusions. The research findings indicate that the similarity between the criminal proof systems of Indonesia and China lies in the presence of proof hearings during the trial process in both countries. The difference is found in the types of evidence admissible in court: Indonesia recognizes five types of evidence, whereas China acknowledges seven types.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
