Expert Evidence and Competence Standards in Indonesian Criminal Procedure: Revisiting KUHAP, the Draft KUHAP, and Law No. 2 of 2017
Abstract
The role of experts in the criminal justice system constitutes an important instrument for ensuring objectivity in the evidentiary process; however, regulatory ambiguities remain concerning the limits of expert authority, certification requirements, regulatory synchronization, and legal protection within the Criminal Procedure Code, the Draft Criminal Procedure Code, and Law Number 2 of 2017 on Construction Services. This study aims to examine the position and role of experts in Indonesian criminal law based on these regulations in order to provide greater legal certainty and enhanced protection for expert witnesses. The research employs a normative juridical method using statutory and comparative approaches. The findings reveal persistent ambiguities across the examined regulations, including the absence of clear provisions defining the scope of expert authority in criminal proceedings, uncertainty regarding the function of experts in providing technical recommendations, unclear requirements for special certification particularly in cases where experts possess practical expertise without formal certification the lack of synchronization between KUHAP, RUU-KUHAP, and the Construction Services Law. The study underscores the need for clearer, harmonized regulations governing expert testimony to ensure legal certainty, professional accountability, and effective protection for experts within Indonesia’s criminal justice system.
Keywords
Full Text:
PDFReferences
Afriyanti, D. (2025). Akuntabilitas dan standar profesi ahli forensik di indonesia: tinjauan yuridis terhadap kekuatan keterangan ahli di persidangan. Causa: Jurnal Hukum dan Kewarganegaraan, 15(8), 121-130.
Alamri, H. (2017). Kedudukan Keterangan Ahli Sebagai Alat Bukti Menurut Kitab Undang-Undang Hukum Acara Pidana. Lex Privatum, 5(1).
Arini, K. N., & Sujarwo, H. (2021). Kedudukan Saksi Ahli dalam Persidangan Perkara Pidana. Syariati, 7(2), 541207.
Butt, S., & Nathaniel, A. (2024). Evidence from criminal law experts in Indonesian criminal trials: Usurping the judicial function? The International Journal of Evidence & Proof, 28(2), 129–153.
Coen, M., & Heffernan, L. (2010). Juror comprehension of expert evidence: A reform agenda. Criminal Law Review, 3, 195–211.
DeMatteo, D., Fishel, S., & Tansey, A. (2019). Expert evidence: The (unfulfilled) promise of Daubert. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 20(3), 129–134.
Dixon, L., & Gill, B. (2002). Changes in the standards for admitting expert evidence in federal civil cases since the Daubert decision. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 8(3), 251.
Du, M. (2017). Legal control of expert witness bias. The International Journal of Evidence & Proof, 21(1–2), 69–78.
Fernanda, T. (2025). Alat bukti dalam hukum acara pidana Indonesia. Causa: Jurnal Hukum dan Kewarganegaraan, 16(1), 121-130.
Hanafi, H., & Pamuji, R. A. (2019). Urgensi Keterangan Ahli Sebagai Alat Bukti Berdasarkan Sistem Peradilan Pidana di Indonesia. Al-Adl: Jurnal Hukum, 11(1), 81-90.
John J. Randolph, Terry Hicks, & Mason, David. (1981). The Competency Screening Test: A Replication and Extension. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 8(4), 512-525.
Kawengian, T. A. (2016). Peranan Keterangan Saksi Sebagai Salah Satu Alat Bukti Dalam Proses Pidana Menurut KUHAP. Lex Privatum, 4(4).
Kotsoglou, K. N., & Biedermann, A. (2022). Inroads into the Ultimate Issue Rule? Structural Elements of Communication between Experts and Fact-Finders. The Journal of Criminal Law, 86(4), 223-240.
Kristyanti, L. P. (2020). Saksi Ahli Sebagai Alat Bukti Dalam Hukum Acara Pidana Indonesia. Kertha Semaya, 8(9).
Lopatka, J. E. (2016). Economic expert evidence: The understandable and the “huh?”. The Antitrust Bulletin, 61(3), 434-460.
Luthfi, F. (2025). Augmented Reality Evidence: A Study of The Validity of Virtual Evidence in Islamic Courts. Jurnal Akta, 12(3), 959-974.
Manurung, E. H. (2022). Kontrak Konstruksi Infrastruktur Ditinjau Dari Perspektif Undang-Undang Nomor 2 Tahun 2017 Tentang Jasa Konstruksi. Legal Studies Journal, 2(2).
Milroy, C. M. (2017). A brief history of the expert witness. Academic forensic pathology, 7(4), 516-526.
Mwirigi, M. O. (2024). Developing and Validating the Evaluator Competencies Assessment Tool (ECAT) Cultural Competencies Subscale. American Journal of Evaluation, 45(2), 280–291.
Priyambodo, M. A. (2021). Mekanisme Penyelesaian Sengketa Konstruksi Menurut Undang-Undang Nomor 2 Tahun 2017 Tentang Jasa Konstruksi. Iblam Law Review, 1(3), 173-177.
Putra, A. W., Rozah, U., & Baskoro, B. D. (2017). Kajian tentang Penggunaan Keterangan Ahli Hukum Pidana dalam Praktik Pembuktian Perkara Pidana. Diponegoro Law Journal, 6(2), 1-12.
Rengkung, F. J. (2017). Tanggung Jawab Hukum Terhadap Penyedia Barang Dan Jasa Dalam Pelaksanaan Jasa Konstruksi Berdasarkan Undang-Undang Nomor 2 Tahun 2017 Tentang Jasa Konstruksi. Lex Crimen, 6(9).
Saktia, M. P. (2013). Implikasi Yuridis Perluasan Definisi Saksi Dan Keterangan Saksi Berdasarkan Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor. Verstek, 1(3).
Saroinsong, L. A. (2023). Asas Praduga Tak Bersalah (Presumption of Innocence) Dalam Perspektif Hak Asasi Manusia. Lex Administratum, 11(1).
Selang, D. J. (2012). Kedudukan Keterangan Saksi Untuk Pencarian Kebenaran Material Dalam Perkara Pidana. Lex Crimen, 1(2).
Setiawan, I. (2018). Tindak Pidana Perkosaan Dalam Tinjauan Hukum Pidana Indonesia. Jurnal Ilmiah Galuh Justisi, 6(2), 227–239.
Shuman, D. W., & Sales, B. D. (1999). The impact of Daubert and its progeny on the admissibility of behavioral and social science evidence. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 5(1), 3.
Stockdale, M., & Jackson, A. (2016). Expert evidence in criminal proceedings: Current challenges and opportunities. The Journal of Criminal Law, 80(5), 344-363.
Sulistyowati, H. (2016). Paradigma Penegakan Hukum Lingkungan Berdasarkan Asas Kepastian Hukum, Kemanfaatan, dan Keadilan. RECHTSTAAT, 8(1).
Umboh, P. J. (2013). Fungsi dan Manfaat Saksi Ahli Memberikan Keterangan dalam Proses Perkara Pidana. Lex Crimen, 2(2).
Wahid, A. (2022). Keadilan Restoratif: Upaya Menemukan Keadilan Substantif. Jurnal Ius Constituendum, 7(2), 307–321.
Ward, T. (2009). Usurping the role of the jury? Expert evidence and witness credibility in English criminal trials. The International Journal of Evidence & Proof, 13(2), 83-101.
Yuspin, W., & Ajlin, A. (2022). History of the Implementation and Development of the Criminal Law (KUHP) of the Dutch Colonial Heritage in Indonesia. International Journal of Social Science Research and Review, 5(9), 514–520
Zheng, C., Yuan, J., Li, L., & Skibniewski, M. J. (2019). Process‐Based Identification of Critical Factors for Residual Value Risk in China′ s Highway PPP Projects. Advances in civil engineering, 2019(1), 5958904.
Arief, B. N. (2016). Bunga rampai kebijakan hukum pidana. Jakarta: Prenada Media.
Asshiddiqie, J. (2007). Pokok-pokok hukum tata negara Indonesia pasca reformasi. (No Title).
Cutler, B. L., & Kovera, M. B. (2010/2015). Evaluating Eyewitness Identification (Best Practices in Forensic Mental Health Assessments). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Hamzah, A. (2006). Hukum Acara Pidana Indonesia. Jakarta: Sinar Grafika.
Marzuki, P. M. (2005). Penelitian Hukum. Jakarta: Kencana Prenada Media Group.
Muladi. (2002). Hak Asasi Manusia dan Sistem Peradilan Pidana. Semarang: Badan Penerbit Universitas Diponegoro.
Muladi. (2010). Kapita Selekta Sistem Peradilan Pidana. Semarang: Badan Penerbit Universitas Diponegoro.
O'brien, D. (2016). An introduction to the theory of knowledge. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
Roberts, P., & Stockdale, M. (Eds.). (2018). Forensic science evidence and expert witness testimony: reliability through reform?. Edward Elgar Publishing.
Simanjuntak, P. (2017). Hukum Perdata Indonesia. Jakarta: Kencana Prenada Media Group.
Soerjono, S. (2014). Faktor-Faktor yang Mempengaruhi Penegakan Hukum. Jakarta: Rajawali Press.
Soerjono, S., & Mamudji, S. (2010). Penelitian Hukum Normatif Suatu Tinjauan Singkat. Jakarta: Raja Grafindo Persada.
DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.30659/akta.v12i4.49114
Refbacks
- There are currently no refbacks.
Copyright (c) 2026 JURNAL AKTA
License URL: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0
Jurnal Akta has been indexed by:
Editorial Office: Jurnal Akta Room 2nd Floor Imam As Syafei Building Faculty of Law Universitas Islam Sultan Agung. Jln. Kaligawe KM. 4, Semarang City, Central Java, Indonesia. Phone +62 24 6583584 Fax +62 24 6582455
Email: jurnalakta@unissula.ac.id