KETERANGAN AHLI YANG WAJIB KALIAN TAHU || INSAN PIJAR

Summary

In this video, Nursali Insani discusses the concept of 'keterangan ahli' (expert testimony) under Indonesian criminal law, specifically the KUHAP. He defines expert testimony as information from a qualified individual that helps clarify criminal cases, distinguishing it from witness testimony. Key legal provisions, such as Pasal 1 angka 28 and Pasal 120, outline the responsibilities and consequences for experts, including potential penalties for non-compliance. The video further explores the differences between experts and witnesses, emphasizing that while witnesses must share personal observations, experts provide specialized insights that can influence judicial decisions.

Takeaways

• 😀 Expert testimony differs from witness testimony in legal proceedings.
• 📜 The definition of expert testimony is found in Article 1, Paragraph 28 of the Indonesian Criminal Procedure Code (KUHAP).
• 🔍 Expert testimony is provided by individuals with specific expertise relevant to a criminal case.
• ⚖️ Article 120 of KUHAP allows investigators to seek expert opinions when necessary.
• 🔒 Experts can refuse to testify if it compromises their professional dignity or confidentiality.
• 🩺 Article 133 of KUHAP specifies that forensic experts may be called to examine victims of crimes.
• 📝 Expert testimony must be provided in writing or verbally, as outlined in Article 186 of KUHAP.
• 📅 Expert witnesses must receive subpoenas at least three days before court appearances.
• ⛔ Refusal to appear can result in criminal penalties, as stated in Article 224 of the Penal Code.
• 🤔 The distinction between expert and witness testimony lies in the basis of knowledge; experts rely on their professional expertise.

Q & A

What is the definition of 'keterangan ahli' as per Indonesian law?

'Keterangan ahli' refers to testimony provided by individuals with specialized knowledge pertinent to a criminal case, as defined in Article 1, paragraph 28 of the Indonesian Criminal Procedure Code (KUHAP).

How does 'keterangan ahli' differ from witness testimony?

Witnesses must testify based on personal observations and experiences, while experts can provide insights based on their expertise. Only one expert's testimony can suffice, whereas witnesses generally require corroboration from at least two individuals.

What articles in the KUHAP pertain to expert testimony?

Articles 120, 132, and 133 of the KUHAP address different aspects of expert testimony, including the process for summoning experts, the types of expertise required for specific cases, and the legal obligations of those experts.

What are the consequences for an expert who fails to appear in court?

An expert who fails to appear may face penalties under Article 224 of the Indonesian Penal Code, which can include imprisonment for a specified period.

What is the role of Article 120 in relation to expert witnesses?

Article 120 allows investigators to summon experts to provide their opinions on specific matters related to the investigation, ensuring that the legal process benefits from specialized knowledge.

Can an expert refuse to take an oath during testimony?

Yes, if an expert refuses to take an oath without valid reasons, they may be detained for up to 14 days according to Article 161 of the KUHAP.

What is the significance of Article 186 in relation to expert testimony?

Article 186 defines expert testimony as statements made by experts in court, emphasizing its role as a crucial component of the judicial process in establishing facts.

What happens if a medical professional who is not a forensic expert provides testimony?

Testimony from medical professionals who are not forensic experts is considered differently, potentially classifying their statements as written evidence rather than expert testimony, which affects its admissibility in court.

What is the importance of the distinction between expert and non-expert witnesses?

The distinction is important because it affects how testimonies are treated in legal proceedings; expert testimonies can provide specialized insights, while non-expert testimonies rely on personal experiences.

What implications do the differences between expert and witness testimonies have for judges?

Judges have the discretion to evaluate and weigh expert testimony differently from witness testimony, allowing them to establish a factual basis for their decisions based on the nature of the information presented.