Truth,bias,and abuse of power: How Indonesia’s evidentiary threshold shapes criminal justice

Abstract

This article examines the role of evidentiary thresholds in shaping the reality of Indonesia’s criminal justice system. Drawing on personal experience as a defense lawyer and criminal procedure expert assisting investigations and trials, as well as relevant literature, this article argues that Indonesia’s low evidentiary threshold facilitates confirmation bias, investigative manipulation, and systemic abuse of power. To facilitate this discussion, the article first provides a theoretical framework for understanding the factors that influence nations to adopt high or low thresholds, along with the associated consequences. Subsequently, it examines the origins and evolution of evidentiary thresholds in Indonesia. Moreover, it discusses how low evidentiary thresholds in both the pre-trial and trial stages foster a bias-prone environment that undermines the pursuit of truth and increases susceptibility to manipulation. Lastly, the article proposes solutions to these systemic problems and highlights obstacles to their implementation.

Keywords

evidentiary threshold standard of proof bias abuse of power criminal procedure Indonesia

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Afandi

(2019) The justice system postman: The Indonesian prosecution service at work. In: Crouch

(ed) The Politics of Court Reform: Judicial Change and Legal Culture in Indonesia. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 86–106.

Afandi

(2021) Maintaining order: Public prosecutors in post-authoritarian countries, the case of Indonesia. PhD Thesis, Leiden, The Netherlands.

Afandi

Bedner

(2022) Between upholding the rule of law and maintaining security: Criminal justice actors in Indonesia’s constitution. In: Crouch

(ed) Constitutional Democracy in Indonesia. 1st ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 67–88.

Alkon

(2014) The U.S. Supreme court’s failure to fix plea bargaining: The impact of Lafler and Frye. Hastings Constitutional Law Quarterly 41: 62.

Assegaf

(2020) Criminal sentencing in Indonesia: Disparity, disproportionality and biases. PhD Thesis, University of Melbourne, Australia.

Baker

(2012) The rise of Polri: Democratisation and the political economy of security in Indonesia. PhD Thesis, London School of Economics and Political Science, UK.

Baker

(2015) The rhizome state: Democratizing Indonesia’s off-budget economy. Critical Asian Studies 47(2). Routledge: 309–336.

Bedner

(2013) Indonesian legal scholarship and jurisprudence as an obstacle for transplanting legal institutions. Hague Journal on the Rule of Law 5(02): 253–273.

Bibas

(2004) Plea bargaining outside the shadow of trial. Harvard Law Review 86: 2463–2547.

10.

Bloemberg

(2018) The development of the criminal law of evidence in the Netherlands, France and Germany between 1750 and 1870. PhD Thesis, University of Groningen, The Netherland.

11.

Bloemberg

(2019) The development of the “modern” criminal law of evidence in English law and in France, Germany and The Netherlands: 1750–1900. American Journal of Legal History 59(3): 358–401.

12.

Brants

Field

(2016) Truth-finding, procedural traditions and cultural trust in The Netherlands and England and Wales: When strengths become weaknesses. The International Journal of Evidence & Proof 20(4): 266–288.

13.

Butt

Nathaniel

(2024) Evidence from criminal law experts in Indonesian criminal trials: Usurping the judicial function? The International Journal of Evidence & Proof 28(2): 129–153.

14.

Cardwell

(1997) Inquisitorial to adversarial: The changing roles of the Italian legal profession. MSc thesis, Central Missouri State University, USA.

15.

Chi

Lan

Ngan

(2023) The presence of the defense lawyer in Vietnam’s criminal justice system: Substantive or cosmetic? Hasanuddin Law Review 9(1): 20.

16.

Chin

(2009) Remaking the evidence code: Search for values. Singapore Academy Law Journal. 21: 52–96.

17.

Dahlman

Stein

Tuzet

(2021) Philosophical Foundations of Evidence Law. 1st edn. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

18.

Damaska

(1973) Evidentiary barriers to conviction and two models of criminal procedure: A comparative study. University of Pennsylvania Law Review 121(3): 506.

19.

Damaska

(1991) The Faces of Justice and State Authority: A Comparative Approach to the Legal Process. Yale University Press.

20.

Damaška

(1998) Truth in adjudication. Hastings Law Journal 49: 289–308.

21.

Damaska

(2008) Evidence Law Adrift. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

22.

Dianti

(2024) Hukum Pembuktian Pidana di Indonesia: Perpandingan HIR dan KUHAP (Edisi Revisi). Sinar Grafika.

23.

Fair Trials . (2017) The disappearing trial. Fair trials NGO. Available at: www.fairtrials.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/12/Report-The-Disappearing-Trial.pdf (accessed 11 October 2019).

24.

Findley

Scott

(2006) The multiple dimensions of tunnel vision in criminal cases. Univ. of Wisconsin Legal Studies Research Paper No. 1023.

25.

Fitzpatrick

(2008) Culture, ideology and human rights: the case of Indonesia’s code of criminal procedure. In: Lindsey

(ed) Indonesia, Law and Society. Federation Press, 502–530.

26.

Grande

(2000) Italian criminal justice: Borrowing and resistance. The American Journal of Comparative Law 48(2): 227.

27.

Hans

(2017) Trial by jury: Story of a legal transplant. Law & Society Review 51(3): 471–499.

28.

(2008) A Philosophy of Evidence Law: Justice in the Search for Truth. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

29.

(2021) Evidence and truth. In: Dahlman

Stein

Tuzet

(eds) Philosophical Foundations of Evidence Law. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 11–24.

30.

Hodgson

(2006) The role of the criminal defense lawyer in an inquisitorial procedure: Legal and ethical constraints. Legal Ethics 9: 125–144.

31.

Jakarta Globe . (2024) Seven Convicts of Vina and Eki murder case re-examined by the police. May. Available at: https://jakartaglobe.id/news/seven-convicts-of-vina-and-eki-murder-case-reexamined-by-the-police (accessed 4 March 2025).

32.

Kagan

(2019) Adversarial Legalism: The American Way of Law, 2nd edn. Harvard University Press.

33.

Kouwagam

(2020) Role of lawyers in and conflict. PhD Thesis, University of Leiden, The Netherlands.

34.

Lai

(2010) Liberalism and the Criminal Trial. Singapore Journal of Legal Studies. 2010(July): 87–106.

35.

Lamchek

(2019) Arresting a due process revolution the reform of Indonesia’s code of criminal procedure and the persistence of history. In: Ciocchini

Radics

(eds) Criminal Legalities in the Global South: Cultural Dynamics, Political Tensions, and Institutional Practices. Routledge, 166–181.

36.

Langbein

(2006) Torture and the Law of Proof: Europe in the Ancien Régime. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.

37.

Hoang

Bui

, et al. (2024) Wrongful convictions in Asian countries: A systematic literature review. International Journal of Comparative and Applied Criminal Justice 48(4): 345–361.

38.

Leo

Drizin

(2010) The three errors: Pathways to false confession and wrongful conviction. Univ. of San Francisco Law Research Paper No. 2012-04.

39.

Lev

(1965) The politics of judicial development in Indonesia. Comparative Studies in Society and History 7(2): 173–199.

40.

Lev

(1999) The criminal regime: Criminal process in Indonesia. In: Vicente

(ed) Figures of Criminality in Indonesia, the Philippines, and Colonial Vietnam. Cornell University Press, 175–192.

41.

Lidén

(2023) Confirmation Bias in Criminal Cases. 1st ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

42.

Liu

Halliday

(2009) Recursivity in legal change: Lawyers and reforms of China’s criminal procedure law. Law & Social Inquiry 34(4): 911–950.

43.

Liu

Halliday

(2016) Criminal Defense in China: The Politics of Lawyers at Work. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

44.

(2003) Power, corruption and the legal process in China. International Criminal Justice Review 13(1): 28–49.

45.

Lubis

(1993) In Search of Human Rights: Legal-Political Dilemmas of Indonesia’s New Order, 1966–1990. Jakarta: PT Gramedia Pustaka Utama in cooperation with SPES Foundation.

46.

McConville

(2011) Criminal Justice in China : An Empirical Inquiry. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.

47.

McConville

(2017) Comparative empirical co-ordinates and the dynamics of criminal justice in China and the west. In: Liu

Travers

Chang

LYC

(eds) Comparative Criminology in Asia. Cham: Springer International Publishing, pp. 45–60.

48.

Mou

(2021) The political heart of China’s exclusionary rule of illegally obtained evidence: A comparative study with the international criminal court. Journal of East Asia and International Law 14(2): 319–340.

49.

Munday

(1993) Jury trial, continental style. Legal Studies 13(2): 204–224.

50.

Packer

(1964) Two models of the criminal process. University of Pennsylvania Law Review: 1–68.

51.

Pangaribuan

(2025a) Authority, rights, and reform: Legislative struggles over Indonesia’s criminal procedure code (1979–1981). Asian Journal of Comparative Law. doi: 10.1017/asjcl.2025.10004.

52.

Pangaribuan

(2025b) Navigating an authoritarian landscape: Criminal procedure and defence lawyers in Indonesia. Australian Journal of Asian Law 25(2): 43–84.

53.

Panggabean

(2010) Rancangan undang-undang hukum acara pidana dari perspektif polri sebagai penyidik [the draft of Indonesian criminal procedure code reform from the police’s perspective as an investigator]. MMH Jurnal 3: 12.

54.

Pardo

(2023) What makes evidence sufficient? Arizona Law Review 65: 431–478.

55.

Picinali

(2015) The threshold lies in the method: Instructing jurors about reasoning beyond reasonable doubt. The International Journal of Evidence & Proof 19(3): 139–153.

56.

Pizzi

(2016) The effects of the “Vanishing Trial” on our incarceration rate. Federal Sentencing Reporter: FSR 22: 330–339.

57.

Pizzi

Montagna

(2004) The battle to establish an adversarial trial system in Italy. Michigan International Law Journal 40: 429–466.

58.

Post

(2025) AGO arrests former court head for bribery related to Surabaya murder acquittal—Politics. Available at: www.thejakartapost.com/indonesia/2025/01/15/ago-arrests-former-court-head-for-bribery-related-to-surabaya-murder-acquittal.html (accessed 12 March 2025).

59.

Powell

Hughes-Scholes

Sharman

(2012) Skill in interviewing reduces confirmation bias. Journal of Investigative Psychology and Offender Profiling 9(2): 126–134.

60.

Strang

(2008) ‘More adversarial, but not completely adversarial’: Reformasi of the Indonesian criminal procedure code. Fordham International Law Journal 46: 188–231.

61.

Tempo . (2022) The cover-up squad for Ferdy Sambo. Tempo, 5 September. Available at: https://www.tempo.co/newsletter/the-cover-up-squad-for-ferdy-sambo-295667 (accessed 4 March 2025).

62.

Weidong (2013) The judicial reform in China: The status quo and future directions. Indiana Journal of Global Legal Studies 20(1): 185.

63.

Zhang

Zheng

(2014) Reforming the criminal evidence system in China. Asian Journal of Criminology 9(2): 103–124.

Supplementary Material

Please find the following supplemental material available below.

For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.

For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.

0.00 MB

0.02 MB