Eksistensi Digital Evidence dalam Hukum Acara Perdata

Nurfauzah Maulidiyah, Yustria Novi Satriana

Abstract


Electronic Evidence Tools can be presented at the hearing as valid evidence and have been regulated separately in the ITE Law. However, in the Civil Procedure Law the formal legality has not been regulated how to show. Formulation of the problems raised in this writing (1) How is the legal certainty of the Electronic Evidence in the Civil Procedure Code; (2) What is the ideal arrangement regarding Electronic Evidence Tools in Civil Procedure Code; The first discussion is that Article 5 Paragraph (1) and (2) of Law No. 19 of 2016 concerning Information and Electronic Transactions (UU ITE) which only provides legal certainty to the extent of the recognition of the existence of Electronic Evidence Tools as valid evidence. There must be an ideal arrangement regarding the Electronic Evidence Tool in the Civil Procedure Code to ensure the legal certainty of the procedure for submission and enforcement is: first, with a mechanism for renewing the HIR and RBg. Second, the party that has the authority to stipulate a Circular of the Supreme Court on how the parties know and see the Electronic Evidence Tool and the procedure for submitting Electronic Evidence Tools.

DOI: https://doi.org/10.26905/idjch.v10i1.2616.


Keywords


Electronic Evidence, Civil Procedure Code, Evidence.

References


Fakhriah, Efa Laela. Sistem Pembuktian Terbuka Dalam Penyelesaian Sengketa Perdata Secara Litigasi. http://pustaka.unpad.ac.id.

Heniyatun, Iswanto. Bambang Tjatur, Sulistyaningsih.Puji, Kajian Yuridis Pembuktian dengan Informasi Elektronik dalam Penyelesaian Perkara Perdata di Pengadilan, Journal Varia Justicia . Vol.14 No.1 Tahun 2018.

Kitab Undang-Undang Hukum Perdata.

Mahkamah Agung Republik Indonesia, eksistensi dokumen di persidangan perdata, access www.mahkamah agung.go.id.

Mertokusumo, Sudikno. 1996. Mengenal Hukum (Suatu Pengantar). Yogyakarta. Liberty.

Mudiardjo.Rapin, Mengantar Informasi Elektronik ke Pengadilan sebagai Alat Bukti yang Sah. Access www.warta ekonomi.com.

Nugraha, Irma. 2013. Pembuktian Alat Bukti Informasi dan Transaksi Elektronik Dalam Pembobolan Atm. Skripsi.

Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor 20/PUU-XIV/2016.

Sugiarto, Enan. Implikasi Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor 20/PUU/-XIV/2016/ Terhadap Informasi Elektronik dan/atau Dokumen Elektronik Dan/Atau Hasil Cetaknya Sebagai Alat Bukti Dalam Perkara. Journal Rechtidee, Vol.11 No.2.

Sutantio, dkk. 1995. Hukum Acara Perdata dalam Teori dan Praktek. Bandung. Mandar Maju.

Undang-Undang No.19 Tahun 2016 Tentang Informasi dan Transaksi Elektronik (UU ITE).

Wahyudi.Johan, Dokumen Eelektronik Sebagai Alat Bukti Pada Pembuktian Di Pengadilan, https://www.researchgate.net, Journal Perspektif. Volume XVII No.2. Tahun 20012.


Full Text: PDF

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.





Editorial Office
Jurnal Cakrawala Hukum
Faculty of Law University of Merdeka Malang

Information:

address icon redFaculty of Law Building, Terusan Dieng Street 62-64, Malang City, East Java, Indonesia, 65146.
jurnalcakrawalahukum@unmer.ac.id
http://jurnal.unmer.ac.id/index.php/jch/
Phone (0341) 580161 Faks (0341) 588395
width=@jurnalcakrawalahukum
@Jcakrawalahukum
Whatsapp IDJCH +6285646664788

Statistics:

Indexing:

indexwidth="145" width="150"
Hasil gambar untuk ebscohost png
ResearchBib Find in a library with WorldCat

Tools:

Turnitin

crossref

MendeleyGrammarly

Supported By:

Fakultas Hukum Universitas Merdeka Malang


Creative Commons License

Jurnal Cakrawala Hukum is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

Copyright ©2019 University of Merdeka Malang Powered by Open Journal Systems.