Compare the rules of evidence as they pertain to criminal cases in Indonesia (under the KUHAP) with those in Hong Kong. Please specifically address differences, if any, with the types of admissible evidence (especially electronic evidence); the weight requirement of valid (or objective) evidence along with the requirement of corroborative evidence in Indonesia, and; restrictions on documentary and circumstantial evidence.
*Please do not write introduction/conclusion
* Please use footnotes
Evidence of Criminal Offences in Indonesia and Hong KongNameInstitutional AffiliationDate
Evidence of Criminal Offences in Indonesia and Hong Kong
In Indonesia, a Judge can only impose a legal penalty on a person after two means of legal proof have been presented to the court to proof that the accused is guilty of committing an offense. The legal means of evidence that can be used to proof that the accused is guilty of having committed an offense can come in several ways. They include the testimony of a witness, the evidence of an expert, and presentation of documents before the court, a particular condition that can act as an indicator or through the testimony of the accused.
The testimony of the witness refers to what the witness says at the court during the trial. Testimony from one witness cannot be sufficient enough to proof that the accused is guilty of the act. The provision above does not, however, apply if the evidence of the witness is accompanied by the other means of legal proof. The several testimonies of the other witnesses concerning the particular event can be used as a legal means of proof. It can only happen if the statements are related with one another in such a way that they confirm the occurrence of a specified event that is before the court or they have some circumstances that led to the occurrence of the offense. An opinion that has been derived from thoughts alone cannot be used to constitute as a testimony of the w...