Uncovering Ronald Tannur's Acquittal: Circumstantial Evidence as a Starting Point for Reforming Criminal Evidence System

Daffa Ladro Kusworo

Abstract


The acquittal of Ronald Tannur sparked a polemic due to the dismissal of the combined charges filed by the Public Prosecutor. The judge's consideration that acquitted the defendant of all charges was based on the fact that when the incident took place there were no witnesses or CCTV footage proving that the defendant's actions resulted in the loss of the victim's life. Apart from violations of the code of ethics by judges, the Panel of Judges should be able to use circumstantial evidence as in Decision Number. 777/Pid.B/2016/Pn.Jkt.Pst Jessica Mirna case. Thus, based on this momentum, there is a need for the legality of circumstantial evidence as a reform of the criminal evidence system in Indonesia. This research method uses a doctrinal approach that refers to applicable laws and regulations and conceptual accompanied by literature studies in the form of books, journals, and other literature. The results showed that circumstancial evidence is nothing but evidence that assesses indirect evidence that does not stand alone, but is based on concrete legal facts and is linked to the sharpness of analysis and conscience of the Panel of Judges. However, the Criminal Procedure Code has never based the use of circumstantial evidence, so it should be a question of how judges can declare the existence of indirect evidence as something that is valid and can be commonly used when litigating. Based on the principle of legality, it is possible that the defendant Jessica could not be found guilty because the doctrine of such evidence has never been recognized in Indonesian legal institutions, especially in statutory regulations. Conversely, Ronald Tannur's acquittal could have been interpreted as in accordance with the corridors of the law because the use of the evidentiary system was in accordance with the technical procedural law. The judge may be said to have crossed the line of demarcation from what should be enshrined in the law because it contradicts Article 183 jo. 184 Paragraph (1) KUHAP because there were no direct witnesses who actually saw the murder committed

Keywords


Circumstantial; Evidence; Ronald Tannur

Full Text:

PDF

References


Buku

Ali, Mahrus. Dasar-Dasar Hukum Pidana. Jakarta: Sinar Grafika, 2022.

Anwar, Yesmil. Sistem Peradilan Pidana. Bandung: Widya Pajajaran, 2009.

Arief, Barda Nawawi. Bunga Rampai Kebijakan Hukum Pidana. Jakarta: Prenada Media, 2016.

Asshiddiqie, Jimly. Penguatan Sistem Pemerintahan Dan Peradilan. Jakarta: Sinar Grafika, 2022.

Poernomo, Bambang. Pola Dasar Teori-Asas Umum Hukum Acara Pidana Dan Penegakan Hukum Pidana. New York: Liberty, 1993.

———. Penegakan Hukum Progresif. Jakarta: Penerbit Buku Kompas, 2010.

Rachman, Fauzi. Metode Penelitian Kualitatif. Bandung: Penerbit Lakeisha, 2022.

Zaidan, M Ali. Menuju Pembaruan Hukum Pidana. Jakarta: Sinar Grafika, 2022.

Jurnal

Alejandro, Garces Cordova Felipe, Suarez Albino Manuel Augusto, and Molina Mora José Fabián. “Jurisdictional Evaluation of Circumstantial Evidence in Criminal Matter.” Kurdish Studies 12, no. 1 (2024): 993–98.

———. “Sistem Peradilan Pidana Progresif; Alternatif Dalam Penegakan Hukum Pidana.” Jurnal Hukum Ius Quia Iustum 14, no. 2 (2007).

Amiruddin, Miftahul Chaer, and Rahman Syamsuddin. “Analisis Yuridis Pertimbangan Tentang Keyakinan Hakim Dalam Memutus Perkara Dengan Berdasarkan Circumstantial Evidence Atau Bukti Tidak Langsung (Studi Putusan No. 777/Pid. B/2016/Pn. Jkt. Pst Kasus Jessica Kumala Wongso).” Alauddin Law Development Journal 3, no. 3 (2021): 531–43.

Ansori, Lutfil. “Reformasi Penegakan Hukum Perspektif Hukum Progresif.” Jurnal Yuridis 4, no. 2 (2018).

Ardi, Syaiful, and Farrel Rafi Hartadi. “Pertimbangan Keyakinan Hakim Dalam Putusan Perkara Pidana Kopi Sianida Jessica Berdasarkan Circumstantial Evidence Atau Bukti Tidak Langsung (Studi Putusan Nomor. 777/Pid. B/2016/Pn. Jkt. Pst).” Ekasakti Jurnal Penelitian Dan Pengabdian 4, no. 2 (2024): 529–42.

Azeem, Hafiz Muhammad, Muhammad Zahid Rafique, Mubashar Tariq, and Muhammad Shahid Sultan. “A Truth in Context: Exploring the Role of Circumstantial Evidence in a Criminal Trial.” Pakistan Journal of Criminal Justice 3, no. 1 (2023): 8–18.

Bell, Clark. “Circumstantial Evidence.” Medico-Legal J. 27 (1909): 56.

Burns, Roy D. “Weighing Circumstantial Evidence.” SDL Rev. 2 (1957): 36.

Daniel P Collins, “Summary Judgment and Circumstantial Evidence,” Stan. L. Rev. 40 (1987): 491.

Dobry, “The Use of Circumstantial Evidence to Establish International Responsibility.”

Enggarsasi, Umi. “Presumption of Innocence in Murder Trials: Legal Principles of Circumstantial Evidence in Indonesian Criminal Law.” International Journal of Law Reconstruction 5, no. 2 (2021): 367–78.

Eyal Zamir, Elisha Harlev, and Ilana Ritov, “New Evidence about Circumstantial Evidence,” Law & Psychol. Rev. 41 (2016): 107.

George Dobry, “The Use of Circumstantial Evidence to Establish International Responsibility,” Transactions of the Grotius Society 44 (1958): 63–76.

Ghoshray, Saby. “Untangling the CSI Effect in Criminal Jurisprudence: Circumstantial Evidence, Reasonable Doubt, and Jury Manipulation.” New Eng. L. Rev. 41 (2006): 533.

Jefferson L Ingram, Criminal Evidence (Routledge, 2021).

Mardhatillah, Adam Bastian, and Ahmad Mahyani. “Bukti Tidak Langsung Sebagai Dasar Hakim Menjatuhkan Pidana (Putusan Nomor: 777/Pid. B/2016/PN. JKT. PST).” Mimbar Keadilan 12, no. 1 (2019): 59–66.

Nissan, Ephraim. “Can You Measure Circumstantial Evidence? The Background of Probative Formalisms for Law.” Information & Communications Technology Law 10, no. 2 (2001): 231–45.

Pangestu, Karunia, Heru Suyanto, and Rosalia Dika Agustanti. “Application of Circumstantial Evidence in Criminal Laws in Indonesia.” Jurnal Hukum Novelty 12, no. 1 (2021): 54–66.

Prasetyo, Yogi Tri, and Diding Rahmat. “Analisis Yuridis Bukti Tidak Langsung (Circumstantial Evidence) Dalam Perkara Kartel.” MALA IN SE: Jurnal Hukum Pidana, Kriminologi, Dan Viktimologi 1, no. 1 (2024): 81–90.

Rahardjo, Satjipto. “Hukum Progresif: Hukum Yang Membebaskan.” Jurnal Hukum Progresif 1, no. 1 (2005).

Ri, Yong-Sok, Yong-Min Kwon, and Wi-Song Pang. “A System of Circumstantial Evidence for Fact-Finding in Criminal Trial.” Journal of Argumentation in Context 10, no. 2 (2021): 245–61.

Rohman Rohman et al., “Sistem Pembuktian Dalam Hukum Pidana Indonesia Dan Tantangan Dalam Proses Peradilan,” Jimmi: Jurnal Ilmiah Mahasiswa Multidisiplin 1, no. 3 (2024): 279–92.

Salsabilah Putri Maesa Daulay, “Analisis Penerapan Pasal 183 KUHAP Dan Dampaknya Pada Putusan Pengadilan Dalam Hukum Acara Pidana,” Causa: Jurnal Hukum Dan Kewarganegaraan 6, no. 5 (2024): 1–10.

Satjipto Rahardjo, “Hukum Progresif: Hukum Yang Membebaskan,” Jurnal Hukum Progresif 1, no. 1 (2005).

Shapiro, Barbara. “Circumstantial Evidence: Of Law, Literature, and Culture,” 2013.

Siti Rahma Sagala and Atikah Rahmi, “Problematika Penegakan Hukum Kasus Pembunuhan Berencana Di Indonesia: Studi Kasus Pembunuhan Berencana Kopi Sianida Oleh Jessica Wongso Terhadap Mirna Salihin,” As-Syar i: Jurnal Bimbingan & Konseling Keluarga 6, no. 1 (2024): 599–611.

Tuharova, O. “The Concept of Circumstantial Evidence in Criminal Procedure of Ukraine.” Law Ukr.: Legal J., 2015, 144

Umi Enggarsasi, “Presumption of Innocence in Murder Trials: Legal Principles of Circumstantial Evidence in Indonesian Criminal Law,” International Journal of Law Reconstruction 5, no. 2 (2021): 367–78.

W Charles Poland, “Criminal Procedure-Proof of Corpus Delicti by Circumstantial Evidence,” Wm. & Mary Rev. Va. L. 2 (1954): 170.

Walter P Signorelli, Criminal Law, Procedure, and Evidence (United States: Taylor & Francis, 2023).

William Mawdesley Best, A Treatise on Presumptions of Law and Fact: With the Theory and Rules of Presumptive Or Circumstantial Proof in Criminal Cases (United States: S. Sweet, 1844).

Yogi Tri Prasetyo and Diding Rahmat, “Analisis Yuridis Bukti Tidak Langsung (Circumstantial Evidence) Dalam Perkara Kartel,” MALA IN SE: Jurnal Hukum Pidana, Kriminologi, Dan Viktimologi 1, no. 1 (2024): 81–90.

Yehezkiel Aldianando, “Pembuktian Tindak Pidana Pembunuhan Berencana (Studi Kasus Putusan Nomor 777/Pid. B/2016/PN. JKT. PST),” 2024.

Situs

Akbar, Adrial. “KY: Hakim Pemvonis Bebas Ronald Tannur Bacakan Fakta Hukum-Hasil Visum Berbeda.” DetikNews, 2024.

https://news.detik.com/berita/d-7509474/ky-hakim-pemvonis-bebas-ronald-tannur-bacakan-fakta-hukum-hasil-visum-berbeda.

Farid. “KY: Hakim Kasus Ronald Tannur Bacakan Fakta Hukum Beda Di Persidangan.” CNN Indonesia, 2024.

https://www.cnnindonesia.com/nasional/20240826163837-12-1137669/ky-hakim-kasus-ronald-tannur-bacakan-fakta-hukum-beda-di-persidangan.

Utisna, Tria. “MA: Pemberhentian Hakim Tak Anulir Vonis Bebas Ronald Tanur.” kompas.tv, 2024. https://nasional.kompas.com/read/2024/08/27/20302081/ma-pemberhentian-hakim-tak-anulir-vonis-bebas-ronald-tanur.




DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.51825/sjp.v4i2.28582

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


Copyright (c) 2024 Sultan Jurisprudence: Jurnal Riset Ilmu Hukum

EDITORIAL ADDRESS

Faculty of Law, Universitas Sultan Ageng Tirtayasa
Jl. Raya Palka KM. 03 Sindangsari Pabuaran Kab. Serang
Telp. (0254) 280330 Ext. 218, Fax.: (0254) 281254
Website: https://jurnal.untirta.ac.id/index.php/jurisprudence
E-mail  : sultan.jurisprudence@untirta.ac.id 

OPEN ACCESS POLICY

Sultan Jurisprudence: Jurnal Riset Ilmu Hukum is an open access journal, so articles are freely available to the readers.

 

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.