ELECTRONIC EVIDENCE IN EVIDENCE Civil SYSTEM

In Indonesian positive law, rules of evidence indeed has changed, both the burden of proof and evidences. Unfortunately, the change was done partially so that the potentially overlapping and inconsistent. Developments and changes in systems driven by proving many cases that go to the green table. Same thing happens in civil law. As a result, the validity of electronic evidence in civil sphere depends on the judge. The strength of proof to be free (p. 204).



Nearly twenty years before the birth ITE Law, South Jakarta Religious Court has actually been made a 'breakthrough' associated with the recognition of electronic evidence. Through the Decision No. 1751/P/1989 dated May 18, 1990, the Religious Court judge summoned to decide the letter / certificate of marriage is consent kabulnya done using electronic media is valid and has the force of law (p. 10).



If the Islamic Court had responded that the development of twenty years ago, why others do not? So did the government have in mind. In 2006 the government earlier had formed a team to discuss the Draft Regulation (RPP) Electronic Evidence Tool. The author is a member of the team.



Civil Procedure Bill which continues perfected in the Department of Justice and Human Rights has also been trying to accommodate that development. If HIR / RBG use of evidence is closed, Civil Procedure Bill proving planning to organize openly (p. 196). It can be seen from the formulation of draft article 83: "Proof can be done with all the evidence, except the Law determine otherwise."



According to the authors, the bill still has not been firmly set, or mentioning verification using electronic evidence. Recognition was impressed shy because only "implied only. If so, say the authors, hopes the law of civil procedure to accommodate the development of an electronic verification system can not be fulfilled.



Compare with the Dutch, the origin of the HIR / RBG. Windmills country that already had a Dutch Electronic Signature Act (DESA) since 2001. Even Burgerlijk Wetboek (BW) The Netherlands has set a clear elektronich vermogensrechtelijk rechtsverkeer, aka traffic electronically property laws (p. 150).



The author, a professor at the University of Padjadjaran in Bandung, located in a group that wants the law of civil procedure to accommodate the immediate growth of electronic evidence. Moreover, in practice, judges generally have received kok.



So? We need to read the authors built an argument in the book that comes from this doctoral dissertation. If you've read is complete, we will be able to determine attitude. And when I read the book anyway, we'll find some errors that interfere. If you do not have time to read in full, on the back of the book index, which was quite helpful.