•  
  •  
 

Abstract

This article attempts to scrutinize the role of expert under KUHAP and examine how Indonesian courts have interpreted and applied relevant rules and principles of the expert in selected cybercrime cases. It finds that the main role of expert in such cases is providing the courts with opinions on the legal and technical meanings of the legal provisions at stake and their contextualization in the cases. This raises a question whether law enforcement agencies comprehend the execution of the provisions. It also shows that law enforcement agencies are not always interested in getting digital forensic examination from which electronic evidence may be produced. It emphasizes that role of expert under KUHAP is equivocal and views the need to improve the role and principles. In order to improve the role of experts under Indonesian criminal law, the article describes and explains the salient features of expert evidence under Dutch law. The article concludes by making a series of recommendations.

Bahasa Abstract

Artikel ini menganalisa peranan ahli dalam KUHAP dan mengkaji bagaimana pengadilan menginterpretasi dan menerapkan aturan dan prinsip tentang ahli dalam putusan-putusan cybercrime. Artikel ini menunjukkan bahwa peran utama ahli dalam kasus-kasus tersebut adalah memberikan pendapat mengenai unsur-unsur pasal pidana dan juga istilah teknis terkait serta kontekstualisasinya dalam kasus. Pertanyaannya kemudian ialah apakah aparat penegak hukum memahami penerapan pasal-pasal tersebut. Dari kasus yang dihadirkan, banyak instansi penegak hukum tidak menaruh perhatian signifikan pada pemeriksaan forensik digital yang dapat menghasilkan alat bukti elektronik. Artikel ini melihat pentingnya penentu kebijakan untuk memperjelas peranan ahli. Sebagai referensi dalam membangun rekomendasi, artikel ini mendeskripsikan beberapa fitur alat bukti ahli dari sistem hukum Belanda.

References

Bibliography Legal Documents Appellate Court of Pekan Baru, Republic of Indonesia. “Decision No. 03/PID. SUS/2012/ PTR.” Constitutional Court of Republic of Indonesia. “Decision No. 67/PUU-XII/2014.” –––. “Decision No. 018/PUU-IV/2006.” –––. “Decision No. 1/PUU-XI/2013.” –––. “Decision No. 10/PUU-VIII/2010.” –––. “Decision No. 10/PUU-IX/2011.” –––. “Decision No. 102/PUU-XI/2013.” –––. “Decision No. 108/PUU-XIII/2015.” –––. “Decision No. 114/PUU-X/2012.” –––. “Decision No. 115/PUU-X/2012.” –––. “Decision No. 117/PUU-XII/2014.” –––. “Decision No. 120/PUU-XII/2014.” –––. “Decision No. 126/PUU-XIII/2015.” –––. “Decision No. 136/PUU-XII/2014.” –––. “Decision No. 16/PUU-VIII/2010.” –––. “Decision No. 16/PUU-IX/2011.” –––. “Decision No. 17/PUU-VIII/2010.” –––. “Decision No. 17/PUU-IX/2011.” –––. “Decision No. 17/PUU-XIII/2015.” –––. “Decision No. 18/PUU-XIII/2015.” –––. “Decision No. 21/PUU-XI/2013.” –––. “Decision No. 21/PUU-XII/2014.” –––. “Decision No. 22/PUU-VIII/2010.” –––. “Decision No. 28/PUU-VIII/2010.” –––. “Decision No. 3/PUU-XI/2013.” –––. “Decision No. 33/PUU-XIV/2016.” –––. “Decision No. 34/PUU-XI/2013.” –––. “Decision No. 35/PUU-XIII/2015.” –––. “Decision No. 36/PUU-XI/2013.” –––. “Decision No. 39/PUU-IX/2011.” –––. “Decision No. 41/PUU-VIII/2010.” –––. “Decision No. 41/PUU-XIII/2015.” –––. “Decision No. 43/PUU-XI/2013.” –––. “Decision No. 44/PUU-X/2012.” –––. “Decision No. 44/PUU-XIII/2015.” –––. “Decision No. 53/PUU-XI/2013.” –––. “Decision No. 59/PUU-XII/2014.” –––. “Decision No. 64/PUU-VIII/2010.” –––. “Decision No. 65/PUU-VIII/2010.” –––. “Decision No. 65/PUU-IX/2011.” IMPROVING THE ROLE OF EXPERTS ~ 129 ~ Volume 8 Number 1, January - April 2018 ~ INDONESIA Law Review –––. “Decision No. 67/PUU-XIII/2015.” –––. “Decision No. 68/PUU-XI/2013.” –––. “Decision No. 69/PUU-VIII/2010.” –––. “Decision No. 69/PUU-X/2012.” –––. “Decision No. 71/PUU-X/2012.” –––. “Decision No. 76/PUU-X/2012.” –––. “Decision No. 78/PUU-X/2012.” –––. “Decision No. 78/PUU-XI/2013.” –––. “Decision No. 85/PUU-IX/2011.” –––. “Decision No. 98/PUU-X/2012.” Convention against Transnational Organized Crime and the Protocols Thereto. New York, 15 June 2000. United Nations Treaty Series, Vol. 2225, No. 39574. Convention on Cybercrime. Budapest, 23 November 2001. Council of Europe Treaty Series, No. 185. District Court of Bantul, Republic of Indonesia. “Decision No. 196/Pid.Sus/2014/ PN.BTL.” District Court of Cibinong, Republic of Indonesia. “Decision No. 292/Pid/Sus/2012/ PN.Cbn.” District Court of Denpasar, Republic of Indonesia. “Decision No. 932/Pid.B/2012/ PN.Dps.” District Court of Gorontalo, Republic of Indonesia. “Decision No. 199/Pid.B/2013/ PN.Gtlo.” District Court of Jakarta Selatan, Republic of Indonesia. “Decision No. 1550/ Pid.B/2011/PN.Jkt.Sel.” District Court of Jakarta Selatan, Republic of Indonesia. “Decision No. 408/Pid.B/2012/ PN. Jkt.Pst.” District Court of Jambi, Republic of Indonesia. “Decision No. 381/Pid.Sus/2013/ PN.JMB.” District Court of Jogjakarta, Republic of Indonesia. “Decision No. 139/Pid.Sus/2014/ PN.YK.” District Court of Kendal, Republic of Indonesia. “Decision No. 232/Pid.B/2010/ PN.Kdl.” District Court of Lahat, Republic of Indonesia. “Decision No. 76/Pid.Sus/2014/PN.LT District Court of Padang, Republic of Indonesia. “Decision No. 393/Pid.B/2014/ PN.Pdg.” District Court of Pangkal Pinang, Republic of Indonesia. “Decision No. 93/Pid.B/2014/ PN. Pkp.” District Court of Pati, Republic of Indonesia. “Decision No. 45/Pid.Sus/2013/PN.Pt.” District Court of Purwakarta, Republic of Indonesia. “Decision No. 132/Pid/B/2012/ PN. PWK.” District Court of Purwakarta, Republic of Indonesia. “Decision No. 16/Pid.B/2014/ PN.Pwk.” District Court of Serang, Republic of Indonesia. “Decision No. 124/Pid/Sus/2013/ PN.Srg.” District Court of Sleman, Republic of Indonesia. “Decision No. 476/PID.Sus/2013/ PN.Slmn.” District Court of Sukarta, Republic of Indonesia. “Decision No. 79/Pid.Sus/2013/ PN.Ska.” ~ 130 ~ JOSUA SITOMPUL Volume 8 Number 1, January - April 2018 ~ INDONESIA Law Review District Court of Sukoharjo, Republic of Indonesia. “Decision No. 268/Pid.Sus/2012/ PN.Skh.” District Court of Sungguminasa, Republic of Indonesia. “Decision No. 324/Pid.B/2014/ PN. SGM.” District Court of Surabaya, Republic of Indonesia. “Decision No. 2191/Pid.B/2014/ PN.Sby.” District Court of Surakarta, Republic of Indonesia. “Decision No. 19/Pid.Sus/2011/ PN.Ska.” Indonesia. Rancangan Undang-Undang Hukum Acara Pidana, (Bill of Law Criminal Procedure Law), Draft 2010. –––. Rancangan Undang-Undang Hukum Acara Pidana, (Bill of Law Criminal Procedure Law), Draft 2013. –––. Undang-Undang tentang Hukum Acara Pidana (Law regarding Criminal Procedure Law), UU No. 8 Tahun 1981, NL No. 76 Tahun 1982 (Law Number 8 Year 1981, SG No. 1981). –––. Undang-Undang tentang Informasi dan Transaksi Elektronik (Law regarding Electronic Information and Transaction), UU No. 11 Tahun 2008, LN. No. 58 Tahun 2008 (Law Number 11 Year 2008, SG. No. 58 Year 2008). –––. Undang-Undang tentang Kekuasaan Kehakiman (Law regarding Judicial Power), UU No. 48 Tahun 2009, LN No. 157 Tahun 2009 (Law Number 48 Year 2009, SG No. 157 Year 2009). –––. Undang-Undang tentang Komisi Pemberantasan Tindak Pidana Korupsi (Law regarding Commission for the Eradication of Corruption Crime), UU No. 30 Tahun 2002, LN No. 137 Tahun 2002 (Law Number 30 Year 2002, SG No. 137 Year 2002). –––. Undang-Undang tentang Narkotika (Law regarding Narcotics), UU No. 35 Tahun 2009, LN No. 143 Tahun 2009 (Law Number 35 Year 2009, SG. No. 143 Year 2009). –––. Undang-Undang tentang Peraturan Hukum Pidana (Law regarding Criminal Law). UU No. 1 Tahun 1946. (Law Number 1 Year 1946). –––. Undang-Undang tentang Perubahan atas Undang-Undang Nomor 11 Tahun 2008 tentang Informasi dan Transaksi Elektronik (Law regarding Amendment of Law Number 11 Year 2008 regarding Electronic Information and Transaction), UU No. 19 Tahun 2016, LN. No. 251 Tahun 2016 (Law Number 19 Year 2016, SG. No. 251 Year 2016). The Netherlands. Register of Court Experts in Criminal Cases Decree. –––. Wet deskundige in strafzaken. –––. Wetboek van Strafvordering. Books Aristeus, Syprianus. Perbandingan antara Penyelesaian Putusan Praperadilan dengan Kehadiran Hakim Komisaris dalam Peradilan Pidana [Comparison between the . Jakarta: Badan Pembinaan Hukum Nasional, 2007. Atkins, B and M. Pogrebin, eds. The Invisible Justice System: Discretion and the Law, 2nd ed. Cincinnati: Anderson Publishing, Co., 1982. Damaska, Mirjan R. The Faces of Justice and State Authority: A Comparative Approach to the Legal Process. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1986. Dammer, Harry R. and Jay S. Albanese. Comparative Criminal Justice Systems, 5th ed. International Edition. Belmot: Wadsworth, 2014. IMPROVING THE ROLE OF EXPERTS ~ 131 ~ Volume 8 Number 1, January - April 2018 ~ INDONESIA Law Review Harahap, M. Yahya. Pembahasan Permasalahan dan Penerapan KUHAP: Penyidikan dan Penuntutan, Edisi Kedua, Cetakan Ketujuhbelas. Jakarta: Sinar Grafika. 2016. Hatchard, John, et al., ed. Comparative Criminal Procedure. London: British Institute of International and Comparative Law, 1996. Hodgkinson, Tristram. Expert evidence: Law and Practice, (London: Sweet & Maxwell, 2007), pp.11, 70. Van Kampen, Petronella T.C. Expert Evidence Compared: Rules and Practices in the Dutch and American Criminal Justice System. Antwerpen: Intersentia Rechtswetenschappen, 1998. Merryman, John H. and Rogelio Perez-Perdomo. The Civil Law Tradition: An Introduction to the Legal System of Europe and Latin America, 3rd ed. California: Stanford University Press, 2007. Pangaribuan, Luhut, M.P. Hukum Acara Pidana dan Hakim Ad Hoc: Suatu Studi Teoritis mengenai Sistem Peradilan Pidana Indonesia [Criminal Procedure Law and Ad Hoc Judges: A Theoretical Study regarding the Indonesian Criminal Justice System]. Jakarta: Papas Sinar Sinanti, 2017. Sitompul, Josua. Cyberspace, Cybercrimes, Cyberlaw: Tinjauan Aspek Hukum Pidana. Jakarta: Tatanusa, 2012. Soeparmono, M. Keterangan Ahli & Visum et Repertum dalam Aspek Hukum Acara Pidana [Expert Evidence & Visum et Repertum in the Criminal Procedure Aspect], Revised Edition. Bandung: Mandar Maju, 2016. Tak, Peter J.P. The Dutch Criminal Justice System. Nijmegen: Wolf Legal Publisher, 2008. Van der Walt, Lirieka Meintjes. Expert Evidence in the Criminal Justice Process: A Comparative Perspective. Amsterdam: Rozenberg Publishers, 2001. Articles Cockfield, Arthur J. “Towards a Law and Technology Theory.” Manitoba Law Journal 30, no. 3 (2003-2004): 383-415. Gall, Heleen. “An Introduction to Indonesian Legal history.” Fundamina 2, (1996): 144- 155. Love, John A. “The Applicability of the Rules of Evidence in Non-Jury Trials.” Rocky M Law Review 34 (1951-1952): 480-487. Hand, Learned. “Historical and Practical Considerations regarding Expert Testimony.” Harvard Law Review 15, No. 1 (May, 1901): 40-58. Maxeiner, James R. “Legal Certainty: A European Alternative to American Legal Indeterminacy?,” Tulane Journal of International and Comparative Law 15 (2007): 541-607. Sass, Stephen L. “Foreign Law in Federal Courts,” American Journal of Comparative Law 29, no. 97 (1981):97-118. Strang, Robert. “More Adversarial, but Not Completely Adversarial”: Reformasi of The Indonesian Criminal Procedure Code.” Fordham International Law Journal, Vol. 32, no. 1 (2008): 188-231. Stewart, Iain. “Mors Codicis: End of the Age of Codification,” Tulane European & Civil Law Forum 27 (2012): 17-47. Websites “Aanwijzing technisch opsporingsonderzoek/deskundigenonderzoek.” http:// wetten.overheid .nl/BWBR0033475/2013-06-01. accessed 27 July 2016. ~ 132 ~ JOSUA SITOMPUL Volume 8 Number 1, January - April 2018 ~ INDONESIA Law Review J.A. Nijboer. “Expert Registers in Criminal Cases: Governance in Criminal Proceedings.” http://www.rug.nl/rechten/congressen/archief/2011/ governancemeetslaw/workingpapers/papernijboerkeulen.pdf. Accessed 26 July 2016. Lilik Mulyadi. “RUU KUHAP dari Perspektif seorang Hakim,” presented in Pannel Discussion “Quo Vadis RUU KUHAP: Catatan Kritis atas RUU KUHAP,” 26 November 2008. http://www.pn-bengkayang.go.id/files/download/ ba68cf1a633506b. Accessed 26 July 2016. Mahkamah Agung. “Direktori Putusan Mahkamah Agung Republik Indonesia, Putusan Praperadilan” (Directories Verdicts of Republic Indonesian Supreme Court, Preliminary Trial Verdicts), http://putusan.mahkamahagung.go.id/main/ pencarian/?q=praperadilan, accessed 1 August 2016. Mahkamah Konstitusi. “Sejarah Pembentukan Mahkamah Konstitusi” (History of Constitutional Court Establishment), http://www.mahkamahkonstitusi.go.id/ index.php?page=web.ProfilMK&id=1, accessed on 21 July 2016. Mahkamah Konstitusi. “Terganjal Permintaan Memanggil Ahli, UU Polri dan KUHAP Digugat” (Inaccessible for Expert, Act of Police and KUHAP sued) http://www. mahkamahkonstitusi.go.id/index. php?page=web.Berita&id=11082, accessed 26 July 2016. Sitompul, Josua. “Datasets Judicial Review Cases of KUHAP Provisions Year 2006 to 2016,” DataverseNL, Dataverse (2018), hdl:10411/2IKNFY. _______. “Indonesian Cybercrime Verdicts of Electronic Information and Transaction Act (EITA),” DataverseNL, Dataverse (2018), hdl:10411/IAOFMY. “Spesialis Kedokteran Forensik & Medikolegal” (Specialists of Forensic Medicine and Medico-Legal), http://jakartapedia.bpadjakarta.net/index.php/Spesialis_ Kedokteran_Forensik _%26_Medikolegal#cite_note-2, accessed 18 July 2016.

Download

Share

COinS