Analisis Komparatif Pembuktian Jarimah Perkosaan Perspektif Qanum Aceh No.7 Tahun 2013 Tentang Hukum Acara Jinayat Dan KUHAP

Abstract

With the development of the times, the level of crime continues to increase with various types of perpetrators. The normalization of free association has triggered a growing number of rape cases year by year. This research focuses on three points: 1) How is the mechanism of proving rape (jarimah) in the perspective of Qanun Aceh No. 7 of 2013 concerning Jinayat Procedural Law? 2) How is the mechanism of proving rape in the perspective of the Indonesian Criminal Procedure Code (KUHAP)? 3) How is the comparison between the two legal systems in terms of proof? The purpose of this study is to analyze the process of proving rape from the perspective of Qanun Aceh and KUHAP, as well as to compare the differences between them. The research uses normative legal methods with a statutory and normative approach, library research techniques, and deductive reasoning with conclusions drawn using the syllogism method. The study results in three conclusions. First, in Qanun Aceh, proof of rape is examined through ordinary proceedings with seven types of evidence. Witness testimony is the most fundamental evidence, but it must be supported by other evidence in order to convict the perpetrator. Second, in KUHAP, the proof mechanism is generally similar but more comprehensive, covering both evidence presented inside and outside the court. Third, the comparison shows two main differences: the number of admissible evidence—seven in Qanun and five in KUHAP—and the status of physical evidence. In Qanun, physical evidence stands independently as valid proof, while in KUHAP it only serves as corroborative evidence (petunjuk) based on witness testimony.