Law No. 20 of 2025 on the Criminal Procedure Code reforms the criminal evidence system by reorganising the types, status and functions of evidence compared to the old Criminal Procedure Code. These updates include the recognition of electronic evidence and a conceptual shift in conventional evidence, including the expansion of witness and expert testimony from the initial stage, the strengthening of documentary evidence, the limitation of defendant testimony, and the affirmation of physical evidence as independent evidence. Comparatively, the New Criminal Procedure Code marks a shift from formalistic evidence to a more adaptive approach by placing judges as the primary assessors of the validity, relevance, and strength of evidence for the protection of the rights of the parties. Furthermore, the author will compare the evidence in the New Criminal Procedure Code and the old Criminal Procedure Code, ranging from the defendant’s testimony to electronic evidence, within the framework of the analysis discussed in more detail in the following section:
WITNESS STATEMENT
| OLD CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CODE | NEW CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CODE |
| Witness testimony does not always have to be based on what the witness heard, saw, and experienced personally, as long as the witness can explain the basis of their knowledge.
(Article 1 point 27 in conjunction with Constitutional Court Decision Number 65/PUU-VIII/2010) |
Witness testimony is evidence in criminal cases in the form of statements made by witnesses during the investigation, examination, prosecution, and/or examination at trial.
(Article 1, number 48) |
The difference in the regulation of witness testimony between the OLD CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CODE and the New Criminal Procedure Code shows a shift from a substantive to a procedural approach. The OLD CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CODE emphasised the origin of the witness’s knowledge, which was then expanded through Constitutional Court Decision Number 65/PUU-VIII/2010, while the New Criminal Procedure Code places witness testimony as formal evidence that can be used from the investigation to the trial without explicit emphasis on the source of knowledge. This shift affirms the role of judges as the primary assessors of the quality, credibility, and relevance of witness testimony in the criminal evidence process.
EXPERT STATEMENT
| OLD CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CODE | NEW CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CODE |
| Defines expert testimony as testimony from a person who has the special expertise required to shed light on a criminal case for the purposes of the investigation.
(Article 1, point 28) |
Expert testimony as evidence in criminal cases that can be used from the investigation, inquiry, prosecution, to trial stages.
(Article 1, Number 52) |
The expansion of expert testimony provisions in the New Criminal Procedure Code marks a significant change from the OLD Criminal Procedure Code, recognizing expert testimony as evidence that can be used from the investigation stage to the trial. This regulation strengthens the role of technical expertise in criminal evidence. However, the premature and repeated involvement of experts has the potential to raise issues of objectivity, including the risk of bias and conflicts of interest. Therefore, the independence and quality of expert testimony must be guaranteed through strict selection mechanisms, transparent assignments, and contradictory testing in court. Nevertheless, expert testimony is not binding on judges, as its evidentiary value is determined by the relevance of the expertise, the methodology used, and its consistency with other evidence. Thus, judges continue to play a central role as the final assessors in the entire criminal evidence process..
LETTER
| OLD CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CODE | NEW CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CODE |
| In the context of evidence, a letter is any form of document or writing that contains information relevant to a criminal offense.
(Article 184 paragraph (1)) |
A letter is a document written on paper, including documents or data written or stored on floppy disks, magnetic tapes, or other computer storage media or electronic data storage media.
(Article 235 paragraph (1)) |
The New Criminal Procedure Code strengthens the position of letters as evidence with formal probative value as long as they are made or confirmed by an authorized official and comply with the provisions of laws and regulations. Documents as evidence are classified systematically, including official letters, minutes, expert testimony, and electronic documents that are recognized as evidence if they meet the requirements of a document or electronic data. Although they overlap with electronic evidence, electronic documents are not identical to pure electronic evidence because what is assessed is their written content, so judges must apply a high standard of caution in their assessment.
DEFENDANT’S STATEMENT
| OLD CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CODE | NEW CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CODE |
(Article 189) |
(Article 240 paragraph (1) letter d) |
The provisions regarding defendant testimony in the New Criminal Procedure Code emphasize that defendant testimony is a limited form of evidence and can only be used against the defendant concerned. The New Criminal Procedure Code maintains the principle that defendant testimony cannot be used as the sole basis for proving guilt and must be supported by other valid evidence. In addition, the New Criminal Procedure Code allows the use of defendant testimony given outside of court to help find evidence in court, as long as it meets the requirements of legality and relevance. This provision demonstrates an effort to maintain a balance between protecting the rights of the defendant and the need for effective evidence in the criminal justice system.
EVIDENCE
The New Criminal Code affirms that evidence is a valid means of proof, no longer merely a supplement to criminal cases, as stipulated in Article 235 paragraph (1) letter e and expanded in Article 241 to include means, objects, results of criminal acts, as well as electronic information and/or documents. Judges have the authority to assess the validity of evidence based on how it was obtained, managed, and its relevance to the alleged crime, including digital evidence. Evidence obtained unlawfully has no probative value and is prohibited from being used as the basis for a verdict in order to ensure the integrity of the evidence and protect the rights of the parties.
ELECTRONIC EVIDENCE
| OLD CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CODE | NEW CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CODE |
| Not explicitly regulated in Electronic evidence is not referred to as a separate piece of evidence.
Electronic information and/or electronic documents and/or their printouts are valid legal evidence. (Article 5 paragraph (1) of Law No. 1 of 2024 concerning ITE) |
A letter is a document written on paper, including documents or data written or stored on floppy disks, magnetic tapes, or other computer storage media or electronic data storage media.
(Article 235 paragraph (1) letter f) |
Article 235 paragraph (1) letter f of the NEW CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CODE explicitly recognizes electronic evidence as valid evidence, including Electronic Information, Electronic Documents, and electronic systems related to criminal acts. This provision strengthens the effectiveness of criminal evidence, but also carries the risk of data manipulation due to the easily alterable nature of digital evidence. Therefore, the validity of electronic evidence must be supported by strict digital forensic standards, including authentication, chain of custody preservation, and testing in court, in order to ensure legal certainty and the quality of judicial assessment.
CONCLUSION
The New Criminal Procedure Code brings significant updates to the criminal evidence regime, but its implementation remains dependent on the capacity of law enforcement officials and the procedural standards applied. Without strong practical guidelines, clear standards, and improved capacity of judges in assessing evidence, these changes have the potential to result in more pragmatic, varied in quality, and sometimes inconsistent evidentiary practices, even though at the same time they allow for greater flexibility and effectiveness of evidence. In other words, the New Criminal Procedure Code opens up opportunities for the modernization of evidence, but at the same time leaves room for uncertainty that requires caution and further oversight in criminal court practices.
References
Law Number 20 of 2025 concerning the Criminal Procedure Code.
Law Number 1 of 2024 concerning ITE.
Constitutional Court Decision Number 65/PUU-VIII/2010 dated August 2, 2011.
Eddy O.S. Hiaries. Theory and Law of Evidence, Erlangga Publishers, 2012.
Author: Charl Lewis Jogi Tambunan, S.H.
Editor: Yohana Maranatha, S.H., M.Kn.