THE EVIDENCE SEIZED DOES NOT BELONG TO THE DEFENDANT – RATIO DECIDENDI STATUS OF EVIDENCE
The panel of judges for judicial review confirmed the PK’s reasons. The consideration is that in the decision of the Rengat District Court, the Panel of Judges did not provide considerations as a basis for the decision (ratio decidendi) as to why evidence of one car unit should be confiscated for the state. From the evidence presented, the car that is used as evidence does not belong to the PK applicant, but belongs to a third party which was borrowed by the PK applicant through the third party’s child by way of rent.
In this case, Judex Facti did not explain the reasons for confiscating evidence, even though according to Article 39 paragraph (1) of the Criminal Procedure Code, only items belonging to the convict that were obtained from a crime or that were intentionally used to commit a crime can be confiscated.
→ Supreme Court Decision No. 99 PK/Pid Sus/2018 dated 18 September 2018.
Source:
Article titled: “Pedoman dan Putusan-Putusan Penting tentang Status Barang Bukti”, written by: Muhammad Yasin, Hukumonline.com, 14 July 2023.
Regards,
Fredrik J. Pinakunary