LEGAL STUDY OF EVIDENCE OF DOMESTIC PSYCHOLOGICAL VIOLENCE IN INDONESIA

Objective: This study aims to discuss the process of proving domestic violence psychologically, which must find elements of the act that can be used as justification and as a reason for someone to be convicted or subject to criminal sanctions. Proof of a crime is needed for the benefit of the judge in examining and deciding cases of criminal events concretely carried out by the perpetrator. Theoretical Framework: the main concept and theory underlying this study is the System or Theory of Proof Based on the Judge's Belief for Logical Reasons (Conviction In Raisone), and accepted by common sense. In addition, the Theory of Proof Based on Positive Law (Positive Wettwlijks Theode). This system deals directly with the perpetrator within a specified time, because this system adheres to the principle of the defendant's guilt based on the absence of valid evidence according to law that can be used to prove the defendant's guilt. Method: This study adopts a normative legal method using secondary data. The research data mainly consists of primary and secondary legal sources. Data was obtained using literature research. The analysis was carried out using a qualitative approach. Results and Discussion: The results of this study indicate that judges can actually believe that the criminal event of domestic violence psychologically occurred, on the basis that there is evidence of the crime that occurred and the evidence in question is the psychiatric Visum et Repertum which is needed as valid evidence, in order to support the disclosure of the reasons why someone is proven to have committed the crime of domestic violence psychologically. Research Implications: Concepts and its implementation are to find at least two or more pieces of evidence or witness statements that meet legal requirements. because if the evidence submitted by the public prosecutor only consists of one witness without being accompanied by statements from other witnesses or other evidence (unus testis nullus testis) or a single statement cannot be considered sufficient evidence to prove the defendant's guilt. Originality/Value: This study contributes to the literature on a good understanding of how to obtain the evidence needed for the purposes of examining criminal cases, which law enforcers are often faced with certain problems that cannot be resolved alone because they are beyond their abilities or expertise.