Abstract
<p>As the provisions of Article 183 of the Criminal Procedure Code, the system or theory of proof embraced in Indonesia is a negative evidentiary system of law which, in the case of proof, is based on the evidences established in the law which may provide the judge's confidence. Based on the above matter, the existence of Decision <em>Number 777 / Pid.b / 2016 / PN Jakarta Pusat</em> is important to be studied in the judgment. The judge gives the verdict by using circumstantial evidence proof theory. The case was decided entirely using indirect evidence because there was no eye witness or other direct evidence that could prove the indictment. The discussion was conducted using qualitative approach with normative juridical method. Circumstantial evidence is new among practitioners, legal arguments from experts are needed to sharpen the analysis. The juridical review of the use of circumstantial evidence is divided into two categories that are recognized by the <em>KUHAP</em> and which are not recognized. Circumstantial evidence can be a solution for judges in verifying cases that are considered difficult. In a law-based State, the use of circumstantial evidence theory requires the regulation of valid evidence in accordance with the current development of cases.</p>
Highlights
The purpose of legal certainty in the implementation of criminal law is very important applied for the realization of justice for both victims and perpetrators
The use of circumstantial evidence in this new criminal case is used in the case of premeditated murder with the accused Jessica Kumala Wongso Decision Number 777 / Pid.B / 2016 / PN Jakarta Pusat This should be further analyzed on the evidence this is academically to ensure justice for all parties
In accordance with the qualitative research approach, this study aims to gain an understanding of the use of circumstidential evidence theory in proving criminal cases in Indonesia
Summary
The purpose of legal certainty in the implementation of criminal law is very important applied for the realization of justice for both victims and perpetrators. The evidence contained in Article 184 of the Criminal Procedure Code shall be the basis of the parties or judges in the proving of criminal cases. The judge's conviction and two evidences are sufficient according to the Criminal Procedure Code to ensnare the defendant with a guilty verdict. The two instruments are interrelated because the emergence of beliefs must be based on sufficient evidence presented in the hearing as provided for in Article 183 of the Criminal Procedure Code. The use of circumstantial evidence in this new criminal case is used in the case of premeditated murder with the accused Jessica Kumala Wongso Decision Number 777 / Pid.B / 2016 / PN Jakarta Pusat This should be further analyzed on the evidence this is academically to ensure justice for all parties
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary 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.
