THE EFFECTIVENESS OF MAHKOTA WITNESSES (KROON GETUIDE) EVIDENCE ON NARCOTICS ABUSE
Abstract
The use of Mahkota witnesses in Indonesia is still a matter of debate today, both among practitioners and academics, because there is no legal certainty regarding the use of this Mahkota witness. The research method uses juridical normative, the results obtained state that the effectiveness of the presence of Mahkota witnesses is to complete the minimum requirements for evidence to prove someone guilty. Where in the case of narcotics abuse, the lack of evidence found can facilitate the judicial process, the Mahkota witness is used to complete the truth to be revealed or material truth. The Mahkota witness does not affect the severity or lightness of the crime, but its usefulness is as a matter of convincing about the defendant's guilt or whether or not a narcotics abuse is proven. The testimony of the Mahkota witness has the power of proof if it is declared valid as a witness, there is no objection from the defendant's legal adviser regarding the presence of the Mahkota witness and the statement is stated before the court which has been sworn in beforehand and the information given is in accordance with the testimony given by other witnesses or tools other evidence so as to prove the defendant's guilt.
Keywords
Full Text:
PDFReferences
A. Books:
Adami Chazawi, 2016, Hukum Pembuktian Tindak Pidana Korupsi, Alumni, Bandung;
Andi Hamzah, 2017, Hukum Acara Pidana Indonesia, Sinar Grafika, Jakarta;
Darwan Prinst, 2019, Hukum Acara Pidana Dalam Praktik, Edisi Revisi, Djambatan, Jakarta;
Firman Wijaya, 2006, Whistle Blower dan Justice Collaborator, Dalam perspektif Hukum, Printed by Penaku, Jakarta;
Indriyanto Seno Adji, 2009, Humanisme dan Pembaharuan Penegakan Hukum, Kompas, Jakarta;
Ismail, 2018, Peranan Saksi Mahkota Dalam Proses Pembuktian Perkara Pidana di Indonesia, tesis, Program Studi Magister Ilmu Hukum Fakultas Hukum Universitas, Hasanuddin Makassar;
Jan Remmelink, 2003, Hukum Pidana, PT. Gramedia Pustaka Utama, Jakarta;
Lilik Mulyadi, 2007, Putusan Hakim Dalam Hukum Acara Pidana : Teori, Praktik, Teknik Penyusunan dan Permasalahannya, Citra Aditya Bakti, Bandung;
M Yahya Harahap, 2007, Pembahasan Permasalahan dan Penerapan KUHAP: Pemeriksaan Sidang Pengadilan, Banding, Kasasi, Peninjauan Kembali, Edisi Kedua, Sinar Grafika, Jakarta;
Muhadar, Edi Abdullah dan Husni Trhamrin, 2009, Perlindungan Saksi dan Korban Dalam Sistem Peradilan Pidana, CV. Putra Media Nusantara, Surabaya;
R.Soesilo, 1980,Teknik Berita Acara (Proses Verbal), Ilmu Bukti, dan Laporan, Politeia, Bogor;
Setyo utomo, 2014, pembalikan beban pembuktian tindak pidana korupsi (asas praduga tidak bersalah dalam negara hukum), Sofmedia, Jakarta;
Soerjono Soekanto dan Sri Mamudji, 2009, Penelitian Hukum Normatif Suatu Tinjauan Singkat, PT Raja Grafindo Persada, Jakarta;
Teguh Prasetyo, 2017, Hukum Pidana, Rajawali Pers, Depok;
Waluyadi, 2009, Kejahatan, Pengadilan dan Hukum Pidana, CV. Mandar Maju, Bandung;
B. Journals:
Andri Winjaya Laksana, Tinjauan Hukum Pemidanaan Terhadap Pelaku Penyalahguna Narkotika Dengan Sistem Rehabilitasi, Jurnal Pembaharuan Hukum, Volume II No. 1 January-April 2015;
Bastianto Nugroho, Peranan Alat Bukti Dalam Perkara Pidana Dalam Putusan Hakim Menurut KUHAP, Jurnal Hukum Yuridika, Vol 32 No. 1, 2017;
Carto Nuryanto, Reconstruction Of The Criminal Sanction Policy And Action (Double Track System) In Law Enforcement For Narcotic Crime Prevention Reffered To Religious Justice, Jurnal Pembaharuan Hukum, Volume V No.3 September-December 2018;
Chant S. R. Ponglabba, Tinjauan Yuridis Penyertaan Dalam Tindak Pidana Menurut KUHP, Lex Crimen, Vol. VI/No. 6/Ags/2017;
Fahrurrozi, Samsul Bahri M Gare, Sistem Pemidanaan Dalam Penyertaan Tindak Pidana Menurut Kuhp, Media Keadilan Jurnal Ilmu Hukum, Volume 10 Nomor 1, April 2019;
Gorby Zefanya Tahitu, Keberadaan Saksi Mahkota Dalam Sistem Peradilan Pidana Indonesia, Lex Crimen, Vol. IV/No. 1/Jan-Mar/2015;
Kornelius Benuf, Muhamad Azhar, Metodologi Penelitian Hukum sebagai Instrumen Mengurai Permasalahan Hukum Kontemporer, Jurnal Gema Keadilan, Volume 7 Edisi I, June 2020;
I Made Sukadana, Amiruddin & Lalu Parman, Alat Bukti Keterangan Saksi Mahkota Dalam Perkara Pidana Pencurian, Jurnal Law Reform, Volume 14, Nomor 2, 2018;
Nadia Febriani, Haryadi, Dessy Rakhmawati, Penggunaan Saksi Mahkota (Kroongetuige) dalam Pembuktian di Persidangan Terhadap Tindak Pidana Narkotika, PAMPAS: Journal Of Criminal, Volume 1 Nomor 2, 2020;
Ni Made Elly Pradnya Suari, I Made Minggu Widyantara, Ni Made Sukaryati Karma, Kedudukan Dan Perlindungan Saksi Mahkota Dalam Tindak Pidana Pencurian Dengan Kekerasan (Studi Kasus Pengadilan Negeri Denpasar), Jurnal Interpretasi Hukum, Vol. 1, No. 1 August 2020;
Sitti Nurhayati Syamsuningsih, Perlindungan Hukum Terhadap Saksi Mahkota Dalam Perkara Tindak Pidana Korupsi, e Jurnal Katalogis, Volume 4 Nomor 7, July 2016;
Sulfiati, Kamri Ahmad, Abdul Agis, The Role Of The Mahkota Witnesses In Proofing The Criminal Action Of Narcotics In The Makassar State Court, Meraja Journal, Vol 3, No. 3, November 2020;
Ticka Pratiwi dan Novena Winda P, Keabsahan Pemberian Kesaksian Oleh Seseorang Yang Mempunyai Hubungan Keluarga Sedarah Dengan Terdakwa di Persidangan, Jurnal Verstek, Vol. 1 No. 1, 2016;
Yasmirah Mandasari Saragih, Problematika Gratifikasi Dalam Sistem Pembuktian Tindak Pidana Korupsi (Analisis Undang-Undang Nomor 31 Tahun 1999 Jo Undang-Undang Nomor 20 Tahun 2001 Tentang Pemberantasan Tindak Pidana Korupsi, Jurnal Hukum Responsif, Vol. 5 No. 5, October 2017
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.26532/ijlr.v5i1.15627
Refbacks
- There are currently no refbacks.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
International Journal of Law Reconstruction Indexed by :
 | International Journal of Law Recnstruction | |
| Faculty of Law, Unissula | Copyright of International Journal of Law Reconstruction | |
| Jalan Kaligawe Raya KM.4, Terboyo Kulon, Genuk, | E-ISSN 2580-9245 (Online) | |
| Semarang, Central Java, Indonesia, 50112 | IJLR is licensed under a |