Abstract:
ABSTRACT
The development of forensic science has significantly transformed the criminal justice system by introducing scientific evidence as an increasingly important means of proof. However, the Indonesian Code of Criminal Procedure (KUHAP) does not explicitly recognize scientific evidence as an independent form of legal evidence under Article 184, creating legal uncertainty regarding its evidentiary value in determining suspects. This study aims to analyze the legal position of scientific evidence within the Indonesian criminal evidentiary system, examine its evidentiary strength in fulfilling the minimum requirement of two legal pieces of evidence for suspect determination, and formulate a legal construction that provides legal certainty while protecting the rights of suspects. This research employed normative legal research using statutory, conceptual, case, and comparative approaches. The legal materials consisted of primary, secondary, and tertiary legal sources analyzed through qualitative legal reasoning. The results indicate that scientific evidence does not constitute an independent category of evidence under KUHAP but derives its legal force through expert testimony, documentary evidence, or circumstantial evidence. Nevertheless, when supported by scientifically valid forensic methods and evaluated alongside other legal evidence, scientific evidence substantially strengthens criminal proof and contributes to fulfilling the minimum evidentiary threshold established by Article 183 and Article 184 of KUHAP as interpreted by Constitutional Court Decision Number 21/PUU-XII/2014. Therefore, clearer legal regulation is required to ensure consistency, legal certainty, and due process of law in suspect determination. Keywords: scientific evidence, criminal evidence, suspect determination, KUHAP, due process
