Paradoks Kewajiban Bersaksi pada Ketentuan Hukum Acara Perdata

Zakki Adlhiyati(1*)

(1) Penulis adalah dosen bagian hukum acara perdata pada Fakultas Hukum Universitas Sebelas Maret Surakarta
(*) Corresponding Author
Abstract views : 71 | views : 14

Abstract


Analyzing witness obligation in giving testimony according to Indonesian civil procedural law is the objective of this writing. With the normative judicial method, concluded There is inconsistency in Indonesian civil procedural law in regulating the witness obligation. Punishment is provided for a witness when they neglected the hearing summons as regulated in Article 140 HIR/157 RBG, but in contrast article 143 HIR/170 RBG stated that no one may be forced to come before a court to testify in civil matters if the district court beyond their resides. Giving the same regulation with the current civil procedural law, the civil procedural law bill shows contradiction within its law and also with another law. Abandonment of court summons as a witness is a criminal offense with a sentence of six months in prison (Article 224 paragraph of the Criminal Code). The inconsistency and contradiction to some extent may bring negative impact to law enforcement and the law should be an amendment.


Keywords


Court; Obligation; Witness.

Full Text:

PDF

References


Abdullah, M Amin,1992, The Idea of Universality of Ethical Norms in Ghazali and Kant’, Turkiye Diyanet Vakfi, Ankara,

Arto, Mukti 2011, Praktek Perkara Perdata Pada Pengadilan Agama, Cetakan IX, Pustaka Pelajar, Yogyakarta

Bartrens, K 2007, Etika, Gramedia Pustaka Utama, Jakarta,

Cahyadi, Antonius, 2007, Pengantar ke Filsafat Hukum, Kencana Prenada Media Group, Jakarta,

Erwin, Muhammad, 2016, Filsafat Hukum, Refl eksi Kritis terhadap Hukum dan Hukum Indonesia dalam Dimensi Ide dan Aplikasi, Cetakan ke 5, Raja Grafi ndo Persada, Jakarta

Fakhriah, Efa Laela Bukti Elektronik dalam Sistem Pembuktian Perdata, Refi ka Aditama, Bandung.

Fukuyama, Francis, 2004, The End of History and The Last Man, Kemenangan Kapitalisme dan Demokrasi Liberal, Qalam, Yogyakarta.

Harahap, M. Yahya, 2007, Hukum Acara Perdata tentang Gugatan, Persidangan, Penyitaan, Pembuktian, dan Putusan Pengadilan, Sinar Grafika, Jakarta.

Milne, A.J.M. 1986, Human Rights and Human Diversity, Palgrave Macmillan, London,.

Mulyadi, Lilik, 2015, Seraut Wajah Putusan Hakim dalam Hukum Acara Perata di Indonesia, Perspektif, Teoritis, Praktik, Teknik Mmembuat, dan Permasalahannya, PT Citra Aditya Bakti, Bandung,

Mertokusumo, Sudikno 2006, Hukum Acara Perdata Indonesia, Edisi ke 7, Liberty,

Yogyakarta

___________________, 2010, Penemuan Hukum, Universitas Atmajaya, Yogyakarta

Rahardjo, Satjipto 2006, Hukum dalam Jagat Ketertiban, Uki Press, Jakarta

Rambe, Ropaun 2008, Hukum Acara Perdata Lengkap, Cetakan ke 8, Sinar Grafika, Jakarta

Samosir, Djamant. 2012, Hukum Acara Perdata, Tahap-tahap Penyelesaian Perkara Perdata, Nuansa Aulia, Bandung,

Sasangka, Hari, 2005, Hukum Pembuktian dalam Perkara Perdata untuk Mahasiswa dan Praktisi, Mandar Maju, Bandung.

Triyana, Djunyanto, ‘Categorical Imperative Immanuel Kant sebagai Landasan Filosofis Pelaksanaan Putusan Arbitrase’, 2016, 3-1, Padjadjaran Jurnal Ilmu Hukum, https://doi.org/10.22304/pjih.v3n1.a5

Hariyanto, Ishak, “Filsafat Etika Imanuel Kant dalam Konteks Negara Demokrasi”, 2015, 7-1, Jurnal Pengembangan Masyarakat Islam,

Rohlf, Michael, ‘The Review of Metaphysics’, Washington, Vol. 66, Iss. 4, (Jun 2013):


Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


 

Creative Commons License

ADHAPER: Jurnal Hukum Acara Perdata (ISSN: 2442-9090 | e-ISSN: 2579-9509) by jhaper.org under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License

ADHAPER: Jurnal Hukum Acara Perdata
Kantor Redaktur Pelaksana
Departemen Hukum Perdata
Fakultas Hukum Universitas Airlangga
Gedung A, Lt. 2, Ruang 210
Jl. Dharmawangsa Dalam, Surabaya 60286
Tel. +62 31 5023151 Ext. 148, Fax. +62 31 5020454, e-mail. jurnal.adhaper@gmail.com

Adhaper has been indexed by:

 

website statistics View My Stats