Protecting the Third Party-Owned Evidence in Corruption Cases: Analysis of Case at the Prosecution Stage

The research aims to analyze and find out the legal protection of third party-owned evidence in corruption cases at the prosecution stage. This research is descriptive with normative-juridical type. The approaches used were statutory, conceptual, and case approaches by using deductive and inductive reasoning. The results show that the presence of a third party in the prosecution trial can cut time in providing legal certainty regarding the legal status of the object claimed by the third party which is the object of confiscation. This provision eliminates pretrial attempts and challenges (derden verstek) against the confiscation of objects of confiscation. The legal status of the object of confiscation which is claimed by a third party is completed in one trial, the prosecution trial; the second is efficiency of case handling for proving the validity of the object of confiscation of evidence belonging to a third party occurs in just one prosecution hearing, there is no pretrial effort and resistance to objections after the decision. The third is avoid disparity in decisions. Separating the evidentiary process in the corruption court with the pretrial and civil proceedings (resistance from third parties or defendants) can result in disparities in decisions that confuse justice seekers. The fourth is avoid the practice of corruption. The process of proving the object of confiscation in one agenda of the prosecution session minimizes the chance of corruption (bribery) because the evidence trial focuses on the prosecution trial only. Keywords: Attorney; Corruption; Third Party-Owned Evidence; Prosecutor DOI: 10.7176/JLPG/102-10 Publication date:October 31st 202