Analisis Yuridis Bukti Digital (Digital Evidence) dalam Pembuktian Perkara Tindak Pidana Ujaran Kebencian pada Putusan Pengadilan Negeri Medan NO. 3168/PID.SUS/2018/PN.MDN

Abstract

Law No. 8 of 1981 concerning the Criminal Procedure Code (hereinafter referred to as the Criminal Procedure Code), has set the evidence that can be done in front of the trial. Article 183 of the Criminal Procedure Code implies that a minimum of 2 (two) valid evidence are required. Article 184 paragraph (1) of the Criminal Procedure Code regulates valid evidence, namely: witness statements; expert statements; letter; instructions; and the statement of the defendant. However, since the trial of Jesica Kumala Wongso which was broadcast on television almost every day, it turns out there is one more proof that is not contained in the Criminal Procedure Code, namely: digital evidence. The object of this study is the Medan District Court Decision No. 3168 / Pid.Sus / 2018 / PN.Mdn., Dated May 23, 2019, concerning the use of digital evidence An. Defendant Himma Dewiyana Lubis Alias Himma for alleged "criminal acts of hate speech". Law No. 11 of 2008 as amended by Law No. 19 of 2016 concerning Amendments to the Information and Electronic Transaction Law which governs electronic evidence. The problems in this study, namely: the position of proof of digital evidence before the trial is associated with criminal conviction; use of digital evidence in criminal acts of hate speech on social media; and juridical analysis of digital evidence in proving criminal acts of hate speech in Medan District Court Decision No. 3168 / Pid.Sus / 2018 / PN.Mdn. This research is a normative legal research using a juridical-normative approach that is descriptive analysis. Data sources in the form of court decisions from the Medan District Court. Decision analysis is done qualitatively. The results showed that: Proof by using digital evidence before the trial of a criminal case can be used as valid evidence in the criminal procedure law institutions, even though it is not regulated in the Criminal Procedure Code; The use of digital evidence in criminal acts of hate speech on social media is based on Article 28 paragraph (2) jo. Article 45A paragraph 92) of the Electronic Information and Transaction Law; and digital evidence used in the Medan District Court Judgment in the form of screenshots of the defendant's facebook account. The need for a revision of the Criminal Procedure Code to add digital evidence as legal evidence.