Diskursus Limitasi Hak Imunitas Ahli dalam Konstruksi Hukum Nasional

Authors

  • Arman Tjoneng Universitas Kristen Maranatha
  • Dian Narwastuty Universitas Kristen Maranatha
  • Keysha Azkia Salsabila Universitas Kristen Maranatha

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.28932/di.v13i2.4585

Keywords:

Evidence, Expert Statements, Basis of Lawsuit, Unlawful Acts

Abstract

Expert testimony in criminal evidence is needed to explain a case clearly so that the judge can decide a legal case with full objectivity. In fact, experts who provide their statements are often used as defendants because their statements are considered detrimental to the defendant's position so that the defendant sues the expert to court.  The approach method used is a normative legal research method, namely legal research conducted by examining library materials or secondary data. The approach used is a statutory approach, a case approach and a conceptual approach. Experts have immunity in providing their statements based on professionalism and good faith, so that the Expert cannot be prosecuted either criminally or civilly. If forced, there will be a weakening of the independence of the Experts and will disrupt the existing judicial system. However, if the Expert in providing his statement is not based on good faith and manipulates the data so that it benefits a certain party, then the Expert can be prosecuted through the PMH channel. In order to strengthen the immunity of the Expert, there must be a strict rule stating the protection of the expert who has good intentions.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Buku Referensi :

Eddy O.S. Hiariej, Teori & Hukum Pembuktian, Erlangga, 2012,

M. Yahya Harahap, Pembahasan Permasalahan dan Penerapan KUHAP, II, Pustaka Kartini, Jakarta, 1988

M. Yahya Harahap, Hukum Acara Perdata tentang Gugatan, Persidangan, Penyitaan , Pembuktian, dan Putusan Pengadilan, cetakan kelima belas, Jakarta, Sinar Grafika, 2015

Peraturan Perudang-undangan :

Kitab Undang-Undang Hukum Perdata

HIR dan RBG

Kitab Undang-Undang Hukum Acara Pidana (KUHAP)

UU No. 31 tahun 2014 tentang Perubahan Atas UU No. 13 tahun 2006 tentang Perlindungan Saksi dan Korban

Jurnal

Astuti Hasan, Keterangan Ahli Sebagai Alat Pembuktian Atas Adanya Tindak Pidana Menurut KUHAP, Lex Crimen Vol. V/No. 2/Feb/2016,

Dhevid Setiawan, Muhadar, Wiwie Heryani, Pembuktian Tindak Pidana Psikis dalam Kasus Kekerasan dalam Rumah Tangga, Pagaruyuang Law Journal, Volume 2 No. 1, Juli 2018.

Fitrah Rizqy dan Syahrizal, Tinjauan Yuridis Terhadap Perbuatan Melawan Hukum Dan Sanksi Nya, Jurnal Justisia, UIN Ar-Raniry, Vol 3, No 2, 2018,

Gita Anggreina Kamagi, Perbuatan Melawan Hukum (Onrechtmatige Daad) Menurut Pasal 1365 Kitab Undang-Undang Hukum Perdata Dan Perkembangannya, Lex Privatum Vol. VI/No. 5/Juli/2018,

Indah Sari, Perbuatan Melawan Hukum (PMH) Dalam Hukum Pidana dan Hukum Perdata, Jurnal Ilmiah Hukum Dirgantara–Fakultas Hukum Universitas Dirgantara Marsekal Suryadarma, Volume 11 No. 1, September 2020,

Michael Barama, Model Sistem Peradilan Pidana Dalam Perkembangan, Jurnal Ilmu Hukum, Vol.III/No.8/Januari-Juni /2016

Muhammad Reza Adiwijana, Pembebanan Pembuktian dalam Tindak Pidana Pencucian Uang, Media Iuris Vol. 3 No. 1, Februari 2020.

Nixon Wulur, Keterangan Ahli Dan Pengaruhnya Terhadap Putusan Hakim , Lex Crimen Vol. VI/No. 2/Mar-Apr/2017

Pranala Luar

Felix Nathaniel, Dua Ahli IPB Digugat & Lemahnya Perlindungan dalam Sistem Peradilan, www. tirto.id, diakses tanggal 20 Juni 2021.

Normand Edwin Elnizar, Gugatan atas Keterangan Ahli Salah Kaprah dan Sesat, www.hukumonline.com, diakses pada tanggal 17 Agustus 2021.

Published

2022-04-28

How to Cite

Tjoneng, A., Narwastuty, D., & Salsabila, K. A. (2022). Diskursus Limitasi Hak Imunitas Ahli dalam Konstruksi Hukum Nasional. Dialogia Iuridica, 13(2), 162-179. https://doi.org/10.28932/di.v13i2.4585