Main Article Content

Abstract

This study discusses the use of indicative evidence as a basis for proving adultery and what kind of indicative evidence has the justification for proving adultery. The research method used is normative juridical with a case and statutory approach. The results of the study concluded that: First, the use of indicative evidence is very much dominated by the subjectivity of judges. This evidence is used after the judge is absolutely sure that the defendant has committed adultery based on the conformity and logical relationship between each fact and the element of adultery that is to be proven. When using indicative evidence, the judge strongly emphasized the fact that the defendant was together in a closed room within a period of time that allowed for adultery, to be linked to the Supreme Court Decision Number 854K / Pid / 1983, which became the legal source of proof of adultery or sexual intercourse. The use of indicative evidence is always linked to the inability of the defendant to prove his argument; and Second, indicative evidence that has justification must meet the formal and material requirements.

Keywords

Crime of adultery indicative evidence rule of evidence

Article Details

Author Biography

Dayu Putra, Universitas Islam Indonesia

Pascasarjana Hukum
How to Cite
Putra, D. (2021). Pembuktian Tindak Pidana Zina Berdasarkan Bukti Petunjuk: Analisis Putusan Pengadilan No. 506/Pid.B/2017/PN Smn. Lex Renaissance, 5(2), 272–286. https://doi.org/10.20885/JLR.vol5.iss2.art2

References

  1. Buku
  2. Alfitra. Hukum Pembuktian dalam Beracara Pidana, Perdata dan Korupsi di Indonesia, Raih Asa Sukses, Jakarta, 2017.
  3. Chazawi, Adami. Hukum Pembuktian Tindak Pidana Korupsi, Media Nusa Creative, Malang, 2018.
  4. Fuady, Munir. Teori Hukum Pembuktian Pidana dan Perdata, Citra Aditya Bakti, Bandung, 2020.
  5. Hamzah, Andi. Hukum Acara Pidana, Sinar Grafika, Jakarta, 2013.
  6. _______, Delik-Delik Tertentu (Speciale Delicten) Di Dalam KUHP, Sinar Grafika, Jakarta, 2017.
  7. Harahap, Yahya. Pembahasan Permasalahan dan Penerapan KUHAP: Pemeriksaan Sidang Pengadilan, Banding, Kasasi dan Peninjauan Kembali, Sinar Grafika, Jakarta, 2015.
  8. Hiariej, Eddy O.S. Teori dan Hukum Pembuktian, Erlangga, Jakarta, 2012.
  9. Lamintang, P.A.F. Pembahasan KUHAP Menurut Ilmu Pengetahuan Hukum Pidana dan Yurisprudensi, Sinar Grafika, Jakarta, 2010.
  10. Marzuki, Peter Mahmud. Penelitian Hukum, Prenada Media, Jakarta, 2011.
  11. Soerodibroto, R. Soenarto. KUHP DAN KUHAP Dilengkapi Yurisprudensi Mahkamah Agung dan Hoge Raad, RajaGrafindo Persada, Jakarta, 2006.
  12. Soesilo, R. Kitab Undang-Undang Hukum Pidana (KUHP) Serta Komentar-Komentarnya Lengkap Pasal Demi Pasal, Politeia, Bogor, 1995.
  13. Sugandhi R. Kitab Undang-Undang Hukum Pidana dan Penjelasannya, Usaha Nasional, Surabaya, 1981.
  14. Peraturan Perundang-Undangan
  15. Undang-Undang Nomor 8 Tahun 1981 Tentang Hukum Acara Pidana, Lembaran Negara Republik Indonesia Nomor 76 Tahun 1981, Tambahan Lembaran Negara Nomor 3209.