Legal Implications of Regulatory Voids in Evidence Management and Efforts to Strengthen Sanctions for Negligent Officers in Preserving Evidence

Authors

  • Iwansyah Iwansyah Universitas Borobudur
  • Megawati Barthos Universitas Borobudur

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.59059/mandub.v3i3.2723

Keywords:

Criminal Procedure Law, Evidence, Police Code of Ethics

Abstract

This study examines the role and challenges of evidence management in the criminal justice system in Indonesia, focusing on issues such as damage, loss, and inconsistency of evidence, which can significantly impact the evidentiary process and the outcome of criminal trials. Effective evidence management is crucial in ensuring the integrity of the legal process and upholding justice. The study employs a normative legal approach using statutory and conceptual methods to analyze the legal provisions that govern the confiscation, storage, and handling of evidence, specifically referring to Article 39 of the Indonesian Criminal Procedure Code. This article sets forth the procedures for evidence confiscation by law enforcement authorities and outlines their responsibilities in maintaining and presenting the evidence in court. A major concern in the management of evidence is the potential damage or loss of evidence during the investigation or trial stages. Such issues undermine the validity of the evidence and can lead to unjust verdicts, affecting the principle of fairness in the criminal justice process. Additionally, inconsistencies in how evidence is handled, including mislabeling or failure to maintain chain-of-custody records, can raise doubts about the authenticity of the evidence and erode public trust in the legal system. This study highlights how these problems directly impact the judicial outcomes and the overall credibility of the justice system in Indonesia. Furthermore, this study discusses the challenges faced by law enforcement agencies and legal professionals in returning evidence that does not conform to its original condition. The return of damaged or improperly handled evidence not only violates the principle of justice but also affects the accused's right to a fair trial.

References

Aditya, H. T. (2017). Kajian Yuridis Pengembalian Barang Bukti Oleh Judex Juris Dalam Perkara Pencurian Dengan Kekerasan. Verstek, 5(2), 189–200.

Alfandi, A., & Natsif, F. A. (2022). Kekuatan Keterangan Saksi Verbalisan Ditinjau Dari Segi Pembuktian. Alauddin Law Development Journal, 4(1), 133–146. https://doi.org/10.24252/aldev.v4i1.16947

Ante, S. (2013). Pembuktian dan Putusan Pengadilan dalam Acara Pidana. Lex Crimen, 2(2).

Ashari, A. (2017). Peranan Barang Bukti dalam Proses Perkara Pidana. Al Hikam, 1(3), 1–18.

Eato, Y. N. (2017). Keabsahan Alat Bukti dan Barang Bukti pada Perkara Pidana. Lex Crimen, 6(2), 75–82.

Gumeleng, F. (2022). Kajian Yuridis Terhadap Putusan Hakim Dalam Suatu Perkara Pidana Ditinjau Dari Pasal 183 Kuhap. Lex Privatum, 10(4).

Helmawansyah, M. (2021). Penggunaan Barang Bukti Elektronik yang Dijadikan Alat Bukti dalam Perkara Pidana. Journal of Law (Jurnal Ilmu Hukum), 7(2), 527–541.

Kuba, S. (2022). Optimalisasi Perlindungan Saksi dan Korban Dalam Rangka Memantapkan Penegakan Hukum Di Indonesia. Jurnal Kajian Ilmiah, 22, 89–100. https://doi.org/10.31599/jki.v22i1.1020

Liklikwatil, C., & Sasauw, C. (2023). Pinjam Pakai Barang Bukti dalam Kasus Korupsi-Tinjauan Hukum dan Implikasinya. Journal Evidence Of Law, 2(2), 131–143.

Makalew, M. I. (2021). SUBSTANSI BARANG BUKTI DALAM HUKUM PEMBUKTIAN PADA PERADILAN PIDANA Oleh: Marcelino Imanuel Makalew. Lex Privatum, 9(8).

Manumpahi, R. B. (2021). Pengembalian Barang Bukti dalam Penyelesaian Perkara Pidana Berdasarkan Kuhap. Lex Crimen, 10(5), 199–208.

Monita, Y., & Wahyudhi, D. (2013). Peranan Dokter Forensik dalam Pembuktian Perkara Pidana. Inovatif: Jurnal Ilmu Hukum, 6(7).

Muksin, M. R. S., & Rochaeti, N. (2020). Pertimbangan Hakim Dalam Menggunakan Keterangan Ahli Kedokteran Forensik Sebagai Alat Bukti Tindak Pidana Pembunuhan. Jurnal Pembangunan Hukum Indonesia, 2(3), 343–358. https://doi.org/10.14710/jphi.v2i3.343-358

Rahmanto, A. (2019). Tanggung Jawab Kepala Rumah Penyimpanan Benda Sitaan Negara (Rupbasan) dalam Rangka Pengelolaan Benda Sitaan Negara yang Rusak atau Hilang (Kajian Pada Rupbasan Kelas Ii Cilacap). Jurnal Idea Hukum, 5(2), 1401–1420.

Ruman, Y. S. (2012). Keadilan Hukum dan Penerapannya dalam Pengadilan. Humaniora Binus, 3(2), 345–353.

Rusmana, O. (2022). Pemanfaatan Anjing Pelacak Dalam Proses Penyidikan Tindak Pidana Narkotika. Jurnal Ilmiah Mahasiswa Hukum [JIMHUM], 2(2).

Sinaga, N. A. (2020). KODE ETIK SEBAGAI PEDOMAN PELAKSANAAN PROFESI HUKUM YANG BAIK. Jurnal Ilmiah Hukum Dirgantara, 10(2), 1–34. https://doi.org/10.35968/jh.v10i2.460

Suhariyanto, B. (2017). KEDUDUKAN PERDAMAIAN SEBAGAI PENGHAPUS PEMIDANAAN GUNA MEWUJUDKAN KEADILAN DALAM PEMBARUAN HUKUM PIDANA. Jurnal Rechts Vinding: Media Pembinaan Hukum Nasional, 6(1), 1–19. https://doi.org/10.33331/rechtsvinding.v6i1.127

Sulastryani, S., & Kahman, H. (2024). ANALISIS YURIDIS PERAN PENYIDIK KEPOLISIAN RI DALAM PENANGANAN TINDAK PIDANA KORUPSI YANG DILAKUKAN OLEH PEGAWAI NEGERI SIPIL DI SMAN 1 LUWU UTARA. Jurnal To Ciung: Jurnal Ilmu Hukum, 4(2), 92–107.

Susilo, E., & Rafi, M. (2024). Implikasi Hukum dari Barang Bukti yang Tidak Dihadirkan: Analisis Konstruktif dan Perspektif Inovatif. KRTHA BHAYANGKARA, 18(2), 448–464.

Downloads

Published

2025-08-07

How to Cite

Iwansyah Iwansyah, & Megawati Barthos. (2025). Legal Implications of Regulatory Voids in Evidence Management and Efforts to Strengthen Sanctions for Negligent Officers in Preserving Evidence. Mandub : Jurnal Politik, Sosial, Hukum Dan Humaniora, 3(3), 146–156. https://doi.org/10.59059/mandub.v3i3.2723

Similar Articles

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 > >> 

You may also start an advanced similarity search for this article.