Relevansi Kebenaran Formil dalam Pembuktian Perkara Perdata di Pengadilan

Bambang Sutiyoso


This topic deserves to be researched due to the fact that the approval of the private legal cases is still being disputed among jurists. This is because, the attainment of formal validity have not reached yet the satisfied legal problem solving practically. This does not express the truth of the fact due to the reliance merely on the formal proofs forwarded in the court, far from the judges conscience. Beside that, according to the Indonesian positive law, the existence of formal truth is not explicitly mentioned, hence, its implementation often generates multi interpretation among jurists. This research is conducted in the area of Yogyakarta Provincial Court’s authority. It includes the High Court of Yogyakarta and three General Courts include Court of Yogyakarta City, Sleman, and Bantul. The subject of the research is composed of judges and lawyers. This is a legal and normative research, which covers both of the library research and field research. Therefore, documentary analysis, interview and distributing questionnaire to the respondents are certainly made. The research shows that the formal validity is still relevance with the judicial system today, it is needed in the context of the private legal cases themselves. The formal truth is confirmed as relevance based on the following reasons. First, in the judicial process, a judge is restricted by the regulations of the approval procedures and chapter 178 (3) HIR/315 (3) Rbg. It doesn’t mean that in legal decision making a judge is not serious, due to the fact that every decision must be made based on deep considerations and rational reasoning. Yet, a judge has to take the principle of feasibility, written and unwritten norms into account. Second, in the private legal procedure, it is strongly needed the availability of the written legal procedure, which is also, written proofs are regarded as more important than other proofs. Third, to give legal certainty, authentic certificate proof, confession and oath, a judge is restricted by certain rule of conduct. The prevention of the possibility of the abuse of those three elements of proof can be anticipated as long as a judge is professional and accurate to do his job. Fourth, in case that the convincing of the judge is not regarded as a requirement in judicial process, cannot be taken as barrier for a judge to enforce the rightness and justice, as long as this conviction can be replaced by proof of assumption. Fifth, those who seek for justice in such legal procedure show their attitude to accept the decision-makers; they do not take further action with regard to the decisions of the judges. It means that the decision of the judge is considered as right and meets the requirements of justice.

keyword : relevance, formal validity, approval, and private legal cases.

ISSN: 1693-4296