Keabsahan Pembuktian Elektronik dalam Persidangan Perkara Perceraian (Studi Putusan Pengadilan Agama Sei Rampah No. 1075.G/2021/PA.Srh)

Abstract

One of the divorce cases that used electronic evidence to prove its allegations was in the Decision tried by the Sei Rampah Religious Court in Case No. 1075.G/2021/PA.Srh. In this case, the Applicant filed a divorce petition against the Respondent. The formulation of the problem in this thesis is: 1) What is the position of electronic evidence as evidence in civil trials, 2) What is the legal force of electronic evidence in divorce cases, and 3) What is the legal analysis of the judge's considerations regarding the use of electronic evidence in divorce cases based on Decision No. 1075.G/2021/PA.Srh. The method used in writing this thesis is the normative legal research method, namely a method that refers to legal norms carried out by means of literature studies to obtain secondary data in the form of primary, secondary, and tertiary legal materials related to the problems studied, this research has a descriptive nature, and the data is analyzed qualitatively. The results of the study found that electronic evidence has been recognized legally-normatively as valid evidence in divorce trials, as stated in the ITE Law. The legal force of electronic evidence is the same as written documents, except for documents that are specifically regulated by law. In practice, as seen in decision No. 1075.G/2021/PA.Srh, the judge takes a careful and balanced approach in assessing electronic evidence, recognizing its relevance but still emphasizing the importance of authentication and fulfillment of formal requirements. The judge considered the photo of the shop building as initial evidence even though it did not meet the material requirements, while the photocopy of the business ownership certificate was set aside because there was no original evidence. This approach reflects a balance between the recognition of electronic evidence and the need for strict evidentiary standards, while still allowing room for technological developments in judicial practice, and emphasizing the need for increased digital literacy among legal practitioners.