Legality of Criminal Court through Teleconferences
Harli Siregar
1
and Topo Santoso
2
1
PhD in Law Program, Graduate School, Universitas Sumatera Utara (USU-Medan), Medan, North Sumatera, Indonesia
2
PhD in Law Program, Graduate School, Universitas Indonesia (UI-Jakarta), Jakarta, Indonesia
Keywords: Legitimacy, Court, Teleconference.
Abstract: Covid-19 Pandemic era now has brought fundamental changes in the order of human life, including in the
matter of criminal law enforcement. The principle of the presence of the accused or witnesses or experts and
the parties physically involved in the trial to realize material truth must be changed by an electronic system.
However, it raises problems related to its validity. In this paper, a research using the qualitatively normative
juridical approach by analyzing the concept of law in relation to real conditions is proposed. To overcome
this problem a strong legal umbrella is needed so that the electronic system in criminal court can be applied
in certain situations. Stronger and more detailed regulations in the form of technical guidelines and their
implementation for law enforcement officers are urgently needed. Moreover, it is necessary to change the
way of thinking that is more honest and constructive for law enforcement officials in its implementation.
1 INTRODUCTION
Technology is something that cannot be separated
from life in the current era of globalization. World
civilization is related to the advancement of
information technology covering all elements of life.
Globalization since the beginning of the 20th
century, marked when there was a transportation and
electronic revolution that spread and accelerated
trade between nations, in addition to the increase and
speed of traffic of goods and services[1]. This
condition makes distance, space and time no longer
a significant obstacle.
The information technology revolution began
since the invention of the computer in its
development is a world of its own commonly known
as cyberspace. The progress and development of
technology, especially telecommunications, multi
media and information technology (telematics) will
ultimately change the organizational structure and
social relations [2]. Telematics convergence is in the
form of organizing an electronic system based on
digital technology known as the net [3].
In the practice of an integrated criminal justice
system in Indonesia, each subsystem makes efforts
to trace evidence and evidence to carry out court
decisions in law enforcement where the authority of
the investigator performs an investigative function,
the public prosecutor prosecutes, the Judge hears
and drops the verdict / criminal as well as the
Correctional Institution carry out the decision /
criminal. The flow of the law enforcement process
has the same goal, namely how material truth can be
obtained to realize the legal goals, namely justice,
certainty and legal benefit.
The successful prosecution of criminal cases is
inseparable from the quality of the investigation by
the investigator. A case can be proven in a court of
law that is inseparable from the ability of the
prosecutor as the public prosecutor to understand
and scrutinize the results of investigating
investigators. The public prosecutor must be able to
state the problem in a good, high quality and
describe the material actions of the criminal
offender. In the trial process the Prosecutor as the
Public Prosecutor can submit any evidence and
evidence presented at the hearing to convince the
judge and obtain material truth.
If judging from the mode of legal thought, the
integrated criminal justice system in Indonesia is
part of the civil law system that is different from the
common law system. Civil law starts from one
general principle to another general principle while
common law starts from case to case. Cases are the
main source of common law, while codified laws
and laws are the parts that make up civil law.
Common law lawyers think within the scope of their
particular groups and legal relationships, while civil
law practitioners think within the scope of the
Siregar, H. and Santoso, T.
Legality of Criminal Court through Teleconferences.
DOI: 10.5220/0010294800003051
In Proceedings of the International Conference on Culture Heritage, Education, Sustainable Tourism, and Innovation Technologies (CESIT 2020), pages 69-74
ISBN: 978-989-758-501-2
Copyright
c
2022 by SCITEPRESS Science and Technology Publications, Lda. All rights reserved
69
regulations that are enforced at the time, which have
been codified or which are based on laws that can be
applied to the situation at hand [4].
The electronic system becomes a global legal
realism that goes to all the pluralist world legal
system families. There is a basic dilemma that is
exposed in a pluralist perspective: the law is likely to
never fully satisfy all expectations [5].
Indonesian criminal law regulates the limitations
of evidence that can be submitted in court as stated
in article 184 of the Criminal Procedure Code and
evidence outside of the Criminal Procedure Code,
namely Law No. 11 of 2008 as amended by No. 19
of 2016 concerning Information and Electronic
Transactions ("IET law"). In the general provisions
of the IET law it is known that the types of
electronic data such as writing, photos, sounds,
images are electronic information while the types of
electronic information such as writing, photos,
sounds, images stored on flash disks that can be
opened through computer devices are electronic
documents [6 ]
In its development, many laws governing
criminal procedural law also regulate electronic
evidence, although they differ substantially in their
categorization. Corruption criminal acts, for
example, categorize electronic evidence as evidence
of evidence, while laws on money laundering,
eradication of terrorism, place electronic evidence as
independent evidence. Recognition of electronic
evidence as legal evidence is not only the court's
obligation to realize it but also constitutional rights
of the community [7].
What has been described above can certainly be
done in normal circumstances and situations while
the world in particular law enforcement is shaken by
the Covid-19 pandemic situation. This has
consequences when everyone is required to do
physical and social distancing. All human activities
are advised to be carried out indirectly (undirect
connecting) but through technological means
including criminal trials in court.
If seen from an extensive interpretation,
information outside the court should be carried out
provided the information provided is live and not
delayed broadcast. E-court proceedings are rather
difficult to implement because there are certain
things where the parties must be formed by meeting
in person and in order to strengthen the beliefs of
judges [8].
This view is very reasonable and realistic if it is
related to Article 154 paragraph (1) of the Criminal
Procedure Code which states that the presiding judge
orders that the defendant be summoned and if he is
in custody, he is confronted in a free state. The
words "called in" mean that the defendant must be
physically present before the trial or court. In
addition, Article 185 paragraph (1) of the Criminal
Procedure Code says witness statements as evidence
are statements made at court hearings. The question
is what is meant by a "court hearing". In judicial
practice, that which is carried out daily by law
enforcers, primarily prosecutors and judges and legal
advisors (where the parties do not allow to be
physically present before the trial) is very reasonable
to be carried out and continued. In this paper, trials
through teleconferences in the criminal justice
system and their validity from the point of proof of a
criminal act need to be regulated in a legal umbrella.
2 METHOD
This study uses a normative juridical approach that
is qualitative by analyzing legal concepts related to
real conditions in the field. As an illustration of how
the court practice continues even though in a Covid-
19 pandemic situation by means of teleconference as
in Table 1 in the form of an online recapitulation of
court and phase II related to general criminal cases
from 30 March to 29 June 2020. Recapitulation of
criminal proceedings in the field of criminal acts
online at the high prosecutor's office in southern
Sumatra from 30 March 2020 to 30 June 2020 given
in Table 2.
Table 1: Online List of Common Crimes Cases.
No. Mon
th
Kejari/
Cabjar
i
Online
Court
Prosec
utor
Phas
e II
1 Marc
h -
April
4.062 57.736 12.984 305
2 May 3.502 46.295 13.622 328
3 June 4.974 62.686 18.525 620
4 July 824 10.195 3.075 114
total 13.362 176.912 48.206 1.37
Table 2: Online Court at Kejaksaan Tinggi Sumatera
Selatan.
N
O
Distr
ict
Attor
ney's
Offic
e
Media
Tota
l
Pr
os
ec
ut
or
s
Vi
de
o
C
on
fe
re
nc
e
ZO
OM
Appl
icati
on
Skyp
e
Appl
icati
on
Cisc
o
Web
exA
pplic
ation
CESIT 2020 - International Conference on Culture Heritage, Education, Sustainable Tourism, and Innovation Technologies
70
1.
Pale
mban
g
34
73
- - - 3473 44
2.
Lubu
kling
gau
68 1458 - - 1526 10
3. Lahat - 67 346 - 413 6
4.
Muar
a
Enim
19
5
520 - - 715 11
5.
Musi
Bany
uasin
- 1370 - - 1370 12
6.
Ogan
Ilir
(Oi)
26 597 - - 623 16
7.
Ogan
Kom
ering
Ilir
(Oki)
- 1204 17 - 1221 10
8.
Ogan
Kom
ering
Ulu
(Oku
)
- - 510 - 510 10
9.
Ogan
Kom
ering
Ulu
Selat
an
(Oku
s)
34 - 246 - 280 5
10.
Ogan
Kom
ering
Ulu
Timu
r
- - 628 - 628 7
11.
Penu
kalA
babL
emat
angIli
r
(Pali)
59 - 122 - 181 7
12.
Empa
tLaw
ang
- - 175 - 175 3
13.
Pagar
Alam
17
4
- 27 - 201 5
14.
Bany
uasin
20 654 32 897 1603 12
15.
Prabu
mulih
- 111 634 - 745 10
40
49
5981 2737 897
13.6
64
16
8
This research took place in the legal area of the
High Prosecutor's Office in South Sumatra by using
a normative juridical approach by photographing
how court regulations in legislation to technical
regulations in relation to literature and regulatory
studies. This research is qualitative in nature by
conducting interviews, asking for the views of law
enforcement officials in the field including the
defendants to test the validity of trials conducted by
means of teleconfren.
3 RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS
3.1 Criminal Court
The co-19 pandemic that is happening now has
brought about a change in the order of human life,
be it political, economic, social, cultural, including
law. Habits that occur in society totally change. As
social beings, humans always live together in social
relationships by meeting or face to face, but the
pandemic has broken the habit and created new
habits for human safety.
Criminal law policy as part of legal politics aims
to realize good regulations in accordance with the
conditions and situations in society through the
authorized institution to establish desired regulations
that are expected to be used to express what is
contained in society and to achieve what is desired. -
tell [9]. The use of criminal law policy can be
interpreted as the politics of criminal law in an effort
to create criminal law in order to function, play a
role or work in realizing law enforcement in
overcoming crimes, especially crimes in the
electronic field.
In terms of legislation policy up to now there has
not been any explicit regulation in the legislation
regarding trials which are carried out through
teleconferences. In Law No. 8 of 1981 concerning
the Criminal Procedure Code has not found rules
about the portion of the trial that is run online with
an electronic system but only manually where the
parties are physically present at the trial. In the
criminal justice system Indonesia does not recognize
what is called a criminal trial through
teleconference, but in its development this is done in
court practice. The judges still use their respective
interpretations related to the examination of
witnesses through the means of teleconference.
In 2002 for the first time the Indonesian Supreme
Court granted permission to examine witnesses by
means of teleconference, namely when BJ. Habibie
gave testimony to the suspect Akbar Tanjung in the
corruption case of Bulog's misappropriation of non-
budgetary funds. If you look at the provisions in the
Criminal Procedure Code both in article 185 and
article 160, witnesses must be present in court to
Legality of Criminal Court through Teleconferences
71
provide information, but in its development there are
always obstacles such as the distance of the witness
so far, security and health factors of the witness.
This condition is certainly contrary to the Criminal
Procedure Code which requires a witness: Facing
himself in court, being sworn in or promising,
Providing information based on what he saw, heard
or experienced before the court. Witness
examinations conducted by teleconference are
increasingly common, such as in the case of Abu
Bakar Ba'asyir.
Although the Criminal Procedure Code has not
yet regulated the use of teleconferences (electronic
means), there are regulations that can be used as a
basis, namely: Article 9 paragraph (3) of Law no. 13
of 2006 concerning witness and victim protection
which says that witnesses and / or victims as referred
to in paragraph (1) can also hear their testimony
directly through electronic means accompanied by
an authorized official. This provision certainly has a
condition that witnesses and / or victims feel that
they are in a very big threat and must be heard
directly (live) not in the form of delayed broadcasts.
In addition, Article 27 of Law No. 1 of 2002
concerning the eradication of criminal acts of
terrorism has set evidence other than those stipulated
in the Criminal Procedure Code also provides an
extension of the existence of electronic evidence.
Thus, the trial by means of teleconference both
in practice and legislation also exists but is still
partial and limited because it is only related to
witness and / or victim information.
3.2 Legality of Criminal Trials
If in practice the trial examination has been carried
out through teleconference and has also been given
space in the provisions of the legislation partially,
but it is still limited to examining witnesses and / or
victims. The question is what about the examination
of the defendant. The current situation in the Covid-
19 pandemic conditions is very very different from
the trial conditions as stated above because in a
pandemic condition physical and social distancing is
required so that both witnesses and victims including
defendants and law enforcement officials may not
meet in a room as required in normal trial.
The big issue is how the trial will take place,
whether it should be paused until the government
announcement about the condition of the pandemic
ends, how the detention period for the defendants
detained, etc. These questions arise and become a
separate dilemma because what if the trial were
conducted online both at the examination of
witnesses and victims as well as defendants in a
different and virtual room, would it be considered
legal without legal basis.
In practice there is a debate related to online
trials via teleconference because Article 160
paragraph (1) of the Criminal Procedure Code
requires that witness examinations be carried out in
court proceedings while online examinations have
not been regulated. In addition, Article 153
paragraph (1) of the Criminal Procedure Code
stipulates that trials in court must be open to the
public except for certain cases as well as debates on
the potential lack of objectivity of judges in deciding
cases.
The above debates and arguments are reasonable,
but the trial must continue because social dynamics
and the emergence of crimes and legal violations
persist even after following health protocols during a
pandemic.
To overcome this vacancy, law enforcement
officials have entered into a cooperation agreement
between the Supreme Court, Attorney General's
Office, and the Ministry of Law and Human Rights
of the Republic of Indonesia on Monday, April 13,
2020 with Number: 402 / DJU / HM.01.1 / 4/2020,
Number: KEP-17 / E / Ejp / 04/2020, Number: PAS-
08.HH.05.05 of 2020 concerning the implementation
of the trial by teleconference. Article 5 which
regulates the conduct of proceedings by
teleconference states:
The parties conduct socialization in their
respective ranks to carry out the terms of the
cooperation agreement;
The parties prepare the completeness of the
trial by teleconference at their respective
positions;
In terms of the technical implementation of
the trial by teleconference, the parties
coordinate with one another for the smooth
running of the trial while still observing the
principle of justice which is fast, simple and
low cost and open to the public;
In handling certain cases, a closed trial can be
conducted according to the provisions of the
applicable laws and regulations;
During the trial, taking into account the rights
of the accused, the victim and witness as well
as the trial of the child, the identity and face of
the child may be known by those who have
the authority in accordance with the laws and
regulations;
Teleconference hearings take into account the
situation and conditions of the place, including
CESIT 2020 - International Conference on Culture Heritage, Education, Sustainable Tourism, and Innovation Technologies
72
the time difference if the trials are held in
different areas.
Teleconference hearings are based on various
provisions of each institution with a temporary
nature and in an emergency or force for certain
reasons such as the Covid-19 pandemic.
Trials by means of teleconference are a model of
the birth of modern justice and can be reached across
borders, but it must be limited that criminal justice is
aimed at realizing material truth, trials by
teleconference must also be aimed at fulfilling these
material truths. The validity of a trial by
teleconference can be tested based on Article 6 of
Law No. 11 of 2008 concerning information and
electronic transactions that have confirmed several
conditions that must be met in the form of
accessible, displayed, guaranteed integrity, and
accountability.
These four conditions must be drawn up and
implemented at the same time in each trial process.
Accessible means it can be published or seen by
many people through electronic means. Can be
displayed means the process is online and direct, not
broadcast delayed. Guaranteed integrity means that
the trial process with the electronic system takes
place in full from the beginning to the end and not
pieces of images or video. Whereas accountability
can mean that the trial process is correct and is
carried out at the time determined based on the
determination of the judge.
Laws are built and created for the benefit of
humans, including electronic systems in criminal
trials, especially if carried out in a state of coercion
and legal proceedings have not been regulated.
Actions or legal actions of law enforcement officers
can be seen from three aspects, namely position,
authority, and procedure. These three aspects in the
current co-19 pandemic situation allow the
electronic system to be used in the temporary
criminal justice system so that the use of electronic
media in criminal trials can be justified or legal.
The data used in this study is only a small part
that shows how many criminal trials are conducted
in Indonesia. For the South Sumatra Prosecutor's
Office (168 prosecutors), they have conducted
13,664 online trials in only four months. The trial is
conducted in two directions where the Prosecutor,
Judge and witness are in court while the defendant
and the defendant's legal counsel are in Lapas, three
directions where the Prosecutor is in the Prosecutor's
Office, the Judge is in the Court and the Defendant
is in prison, four directions where the Prosecutor is
in the Prosecutor's Office, the Judge is in the Court,
the Witness is examined from the Police office and
the defendant is in Lapas and, five directions where
the Prosecutor is in the Prosecutor's Office, the
Judge is in the court, the Witness is examined from
the Police office, the Defendant is in Lapas and the
defendant's legal counsel is in his law office.
Overall, trials with electronic systems are mostly
conducted with three-way systems.
The trial system, which is carried out both
manually and electronically, is an evidentiary
framework aimed at realizing material truth.
Criminal proceedings are part of the verification
process. There are several systems of proof theory,
among others, based on Bewijstheorie positive
reality test, evidence based on Conviction Intime,
evidence based on Conviction Intime on Raisonnee
Laconviction, verification based on Negative
Wettelijk Bewijstheorie [8]. Indonesia adheres to the
fourth system in which the accused or defendant is
guilty of at least two legal pieces of evidence plus
the judge's conviction. The words "two valid pieces
of evidence" are usually implemented through the
trial to verify whether the evidence obtained by the
investigator and brought by the Public Prosecutor to
the front of the trial can be judged as evidence and
the process mechanism is known as the trial process.
If all this time the trial has been conducted face-to-
face and manually face to face, with the Covid-19
pandemic conditions carried out electronically
through teleconferencing facilities both with video
conferencing, zoom applications, cisco webex
applications, and skype applications.
4 CONCLUSIONS
The existence of an electronic system by means of
teleconference in the conduct of criminal
proceedings has become a legal necessity due to the
demands of dynamics and the situation of the
community even though it is not regulated in the
existing legal provisions. The position of the
electronic system by means of teleconference in
criminal law enforcement has been recognized and
implemented in the world of judicial practice or
trials on the basis of a joint policy between law
enforcement officials to meet the needs of the
community and overcome the legal vacuum.
Recommendations:
The renewal of the Criminal Procedure Code by
utilizing the moment of the planned changes in the
Criminal Procedure Code to place the electronic
system in criminal trials for certain situations or
circumstances as a formal legal umbrella is needed,
Legality of Criminal Court through Teleconferences
73
including preparing standardization of online trial
administration.
Culture set of law enforcement officers in the
framework of quality criminal law enforcement and
responsibility through teleconference facilities or
electronic systems so that legal objectives can be
achieved well is needed.
REFERENCES
Didik M. Arief Mansur., 2009. Cyber Law Aspek Hukum
Teknologi Informasi, Bandung, Aditama, p. 2.
Ibid, p. 21-22.
Makarim, Edmon., 2017. Pengantar Hukum Telematika,
Suatu Kompilasi Kajian. PT. Raja Grafindo Persada,
Jakarta, p. 4.
De Cruz, Peter., 2017. Perbandingan Sistem Hukum,
Common Law, Civil Law and Socialist Law.
Diterjemahkan Narulita Yusron, Penerbit Nusa Media,
p. 53-54.
Menski, Werner., 2017. Perbandingan Hukum dalam
Konteks Global. Sistem Eropa, Asia dan Afrika
(Diterjemahkan oleh M. Khozim. Penerbit Nusa
Media, p. 795.
https://www.mahkamahagung.go.id/id/artikel/3048/eksiste
nsi-dokumen-elektronik-di-persidangan-perdata.
diakses tanggal 12 Desember 2019.
Sirait, Ningrum Natasya., Focus Group Discussion,
Permasalahan Pengaturan Alat Bukti Elektronik,
Dalam Sistem Hukum Di Indonesia, Penelitian
Eksistensi Bukti.
Elektronik Dalam Sistem Peradilan Indonesia,
Diselenggarakan oleh Mahkamah Agung RI Badan
Penelitian dan Pengembangan Pendidikan dan
Pelatihan Hukum dan Peradilan, Hotel Adimulia,
Medan 4 Maret 2020.
Alvi Syahrin, FH-USU, Bahan Perkuliahan Sitem
Peradilan, Program S-3 USU Medan, 6 Maret 2020.
Arief, Barda Nawawi, Rampai, Bunga., 2008. Kebijakan
Hukum Pidana, Perkembangan Penyusunan Konsep
KUHP Baru, Edisi ke-1. Kencana Prena Media
Group, p. 22.
Hamzah, Andi., 2008. Hukum Acara Pidana Indonesia.
Sinar Grafika, p. 251-257.
CESIT 2020 - International Conference on Culture Heritage, Education, Sustainable Tourism, and Innovation Technologies
74