Komparasi Sistem Pembuktian Hukum Acara Pidana Antara Indonesia Dengan Republik Rakyat Cina

Indonesia regulates its criminal proof system in the Indonesian Criminal Procedure Code, while China governs its proof system under the Criminal Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China. Although both Indonesia and China follow a Civil Law system, there are similarities and differences in their criminal proof systems. This study employs a normative legal research approach with a descriptive-analytical nature, utilizing secondary data analyzed qualitatively and drawing deductive conclusions. The research findings indicate that the similarity between the criminal proof systems of Indonesia and China lies in the presence of proof hearings during the trial process in both countries. The difference is found in the types of evidence admissible in court: Indonesia recognizes five types of evidence, whereas China acknowledges seven types.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Reformasi Hukum Trisakti
Published
2024-08-30
DOI
https://doi.org/10.25105/refor.v6i3.21220
Primary Topic
Legal Studies and Policies
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Komparasi Sistem Pembuktian Hukum Acara Pidana Antara Indonesia Dengan Republik Rakyat Cina

Muhammad Alvaro Syahputra, Dyah Setyorini
Reformasi Hukum Trisakti
Legal Studies and Policies
article

Komparasi Sistem Pembuktian Hukum Acara Pidana Antara Indonesia Dengan Republik Rakyat Cina

Muhammad Alvaro Syahputra, Dyah Setyorini
article en

Abstract

Indonesia regulates its criminal proof system in the Indonesian Criminal Procedure Code, while China governs its proof system under the Criminal Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China. Although both Indonesia and China follow a Civil Law system, there are similarities and differences in their criminal proof systems. This study employs a normative legal research approach with a descriptive-analytical nature, utilizing secondary data analyzed qualitatively and drawing deductive conclusions. The research findings indicate that the similarity between the criminal proof systems of Indonesia and China lies in the presence of proof hearings during the trial process in both countries. The difference is found in the types of evidence admissible in court: Indonesia recognizes five types of evidence, whereas China acknowledges seven types.

Reformasi Hukum TrisaktiVol. 6(3)
Universitas Trisakti (ID)
Openalex Percentile: Top 72%
Legal Studies and Policies
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.