JURIDICAL ANALYSIS OF PROOF PROCESS TO DISCOVER THE MATERIAL TRUTH IN DEFAMATION CASES (CASE STUDY DECISION NO.1960/PID.SUS/2018/PN.MEDAN) ANALISIS YURIDIS PROSES PEMBUKTIAN UNTUK MENEMUKAN KEBENARAN MATERIIL DALAM KASUS PENCEMARAN NAMA BAIK (STUDI KASUS PUTUSAN NO.1960/PID.SUS/2018/PN.MEDAN) Section Articles

Abstract

This research aims to determine the Juridical Analysis of the Evidence Process to Find Material Truth in Defamation Cases (Case Study of Decision No.1960/Pid.Sus/2018/Pn.Medan). Research is a translation from English, namely research which comes from the word re ( return) and to search (search) thus logically means "Search again. The research location for writing this thesis is the Medan District Court. In this research, the author conducted research on legal principles, legal systematics, as well as vertical synchronization of the documents studied against applicable laws and regulations. Primary data is data obtained directly from the original source by conducting observations, interviews, questionnaires or samples. In this case the author conducted an interview directly at the Medan District Court. Data obtained through research activities will then be collected and analyzed qualitatively and then presented descriptively, namely by describing, explaining and adding to the problems closely related to this research. Based on research results, the factors that could cause the defendant to commit criminal acts of defamation in case Number 1960/2018/pidsus/pn/medan according to the author are driven by internal factors, namely the defendant's curiosity and inquisitiveness regarding issues developing in the environment. PDAM Tirtanadi Medan and external factors, namely the defendant was moved to participate in commenting on other people's posts which led the defendant to participate in writing status posts that were not true from his own perspective and without prior to searching for the truth of what was happening rationally and objectively. The judge's consideration in this case is at the judex facti level, that is, as the authority to assess the evidence and examine the legal facts revealed in the trial, it must be based on the public prosecutor's indictment, so in other words, the panel of judges uses the indictment as a parameter to decide whether the The prosecutor's entire indictment can be proven by the prosecutor at the evidentiary stage along with all the elements of the Article and material facts that are proven and whether they can provide confidence to the panel of judges who will assess the strength of the evidence.