The Principle of Audi et Alteram Partem in the Process of Proof in Criminal Cases (Analysis of Decision No. 123/PID.B/2022/PN YYK)

 https://ejurnal.ung.ac.id/index.php/JL/article/view/26079/9442

The Principle of Audi et Alteram Partem in the Process of Proof in Criminal Cases

(Analysis of Decision No. 123/PID.B/2022/PN YYK) 

Abstract

This research examines the application of the audi et alteram partem principle by the panel of judges in case Number 123/Pid.B/2022/PN Yyk, focusing on how it influenced the judicial decision-making process. The audi et alteram partem principle, which ensures that both parties in a trial have an equal opportunity to present their arguments and evidence, is central to ensuring justice and fairness in legal proceedings. However, this study finds that the principle was not fully applied in this case, leading to an imbalance in the trial. The research combines normative and empirical methods, including interviews and literature reviews, to explore whether the evidence presented was adequately considered according to the Criminal Procedure Law. Findings suggest that the judges’ failure to properly apply this principle resulted in a decision that did not meet the required standard of balance or fairness, ultimately weakening the defendant’s position. This research highlights the urgent need for judicial reforms to strengthen adherence to procedural fairness, ensuring that legal decisions reflect the facts of the case and the fundamental principles of justice. The study contributes to the broader understanding of how judicial practices affect the fairness of criminal trials in Indonesia, offering recommendations for improving the application of legal principles in future cases

Conclusion 

Principle audi et alteram partem is a fundamental principle that judges must apply in deciding based on the evidentiary process in criminal cases. The essence of the principle of audi et alteram partem in a criminal case serves as a form of implementing the values of justice and a balance of rights for the litigants, especially the one who is brought before the trial as a defendant. Considering that a person who is suspected or accused of having committed a criminal act against himself does not necessarily mean that he is guilty, considering the principle of presumption of innocence. A defendant has the right to defend himself either by presenting evidence at trial or refuting information in the indictment released by the Public Prosecutor.

The panel of judges in a criminal case should also pay attention to the facts revealed at trial objectively by listening to both parties—the Public Prosecutor and the defendant. All the facts revealed at the trial are used as the basis for the panel of judges to provide legal considerations (in their decision). Decision No.123/Pid.B/2022/PN Yyk indicates that the panel of judges examining the case did not pay attention to the principle of audi et alteram partem. It can be seen that the  panel of judges did not explore the substantive truth regarding the discrepancy between the post mortem et repertum of the victim's death and the evidence presented. The judges disregarded CCTV footage that implicated the defendant, dismissed the testimony of a de charge witnesses by labelling them as having poor moral character without substantiating this claim through police records, and failed to consider the provisions of Article 185 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Code. It is hoped that the Supreme Court will proactively disseminate comprehensive guidelines for judges to ensure fair and just decision-making processes and strengthen internal oversight mechanisms to maintain judicial integrity

https://ejurnal.ung.ac.id/index.php/JL/article/view/26079/9442