Dissecting the Differences between Crown Witnesses and Justice Collaborators

Kukun Abdul Syakur Munawar; Filda Vitalia

doi:10.47268/tatohi.v5i8.3304

Dissecting the Differences between Crown Witnesses and Justice Collaborators

Kukun Abdul Syakur Munawar⁽¹⁾, Filda Vitalia⁽²⁾

(1) Miftahul Huda Al Azhar Institute, Kota Banjar, Indonesia
(2) Brebes Islamic Religious College, Brebes, Indonesia
email

Corresponding Author

Abstract

Introduction: This paper thoroughly examines the conceptual and legal distinctions between crown witnesses and justice collaborators within the Indonesian criminal law framework, as well as their ramifications for the concepts of fair trial and the human rights of defendants.

Purposes of the Research: This paper aims to thoroughly analyze the legal status, normative foundation, and implications of using these two groups of witnesses within the framework of procedural justice for defendants.

Methods of the Research: This research employs normative legal methodologies, utilizing an analytical approach to positive law, Supreme Court jurisprudence, and relevant human rights concepts.

Findings of the Research: The research indicates that the crown witness, stemming from prosecution case-splitting, often violates the principle of non-self-incrimination and undermines the rights of the accused. Conversely, justice collaborators, governed by Supreme Court Circular Letter Number 4 of 2011, adhere to due process of law by voluntary collaboration and a precise legislative framework. The study's novelty is in its comparative analysis that distinctly differentiates these two often-confused processes by including doctrinal interpretation and human rights views. This study addresses a deficiency in previous research, which has seldom investigated their normative convergence, and advocates for a more cohesive, rights-based framework for managing offenders within Indonesia's criminal justice system.

Keywords

Crown Witness; Justice Collaborator; Fair Trial.

DOI

10.47268/tatohi.v5i8.3304

Published

2025-11-04

How To Cite

APA: Munawar, K.A., & Vitalia, F. (2025). Dissecting the Differences between Crown Witnesses and Justice Collaborators. TATOHI: Jurnal Ilmu Hukum, 5(8), 379-388. DOI: https://doi.org/10.47268/tatohi.v5i8.3304.

IEEE: K.A. Munawar, and F. Vitalia, "Dissecting the Differences between Crown Witnesses and Justice Collaborators", TATOHI J. Ilmu Huk., vol. 5, no. 8, pp. 379-388, Nov. 2025. Accessed on: Nov. 8, 2025. [Online]. Available DOI: https://doi.org/10.47268/tatohi.v5i8.3304

Harvard: Munawar, K.A., and Vitalia, F., (2025). "Dissecting the Differences between Crown Witnesses and Justice Collaborators". TATOHI: Jurnal Ilmu Hukum, Volume 5(8), pp. 379-388. [Online]. Available DOI: https://doi.org/10.47268/tatohi.v5i8.3304 (Accessed on: 8 November 2025)

Chicago: Munawar, Kukun Abdul Syakur, and Filda Vitalia. "Dissecting the Differences between Crown Witnesses and Justice Collaborators." TATOHI: Jurnal Ilmu Hukum 5, no. 8 (November 4, 2025): 379-388. Accessed November 8, 2025. doi:10.47268/tatohi.v5i8.3304

Vancouver: Munawar KA, Vitalia F. Dissecting the Differences between Crown Witnesses and Justice Collaborators. TATOHI J. Ilmu Huk. [Internet]. 2025 Nov 4 [cited 2025 Nov 8];5(8):379-388. Available from: https://doi.org/10.47268/tatohi.v5i8.3304

MLA 8th: Munawar, Kukun Abdul Syakur, and Filda Vitalia. "Dissecting the Differences between Crown Witnesses and Justice Collaborators." TATOHI: Jurnal Ilmu Hukum, vol. 5, no. 8, 4 Nov. 2025, pp. 379-388, doi:10.47268/tatohi.v5i8.3304. Accessed 8 Nov. 2025.

BibTeX:

@article{TATOHI3304,
		author = {Kukun Munawar and Filda Vitalia},
		title = {Dissecting the Differences between Crown Witnesses and Justice Collaborators},
		journal = {TATOHI: Jurnal Ilmu Hukum},
		volume = {5},
		number = {8},
		year = {2025},
		keywords = {Crown Witness; Justice Collaborator; Fair Trial.},
		abstract = {Introduction: This paper thoroughly examines the conceptual and legal distinctions between crown witnesses and justice collaborators within the Indonesian criminal law framework, as well as their ramifications for the concepts of fair trial and the human rights of defendants.Purposes of the Research: This paper aims to thoroughly analyze the legal status, normative foundation, and implications of using these two groups of witnesses within the framework of procedural justice for defendants.Methods of the Research: This research employs normative legal methodologies, utilizing an analytical approach to positive law, Supreme Court jurisprudence, and relevant human rights concepts.Findings of the Research: The research indicates that the crown witness, stemming from prosecution case-splitting, often violates the principle of non-self-incrimination and undermines the rights of the accused. Conversely, justice collaborators, governed by Supreme Court Circular Letter Number 4 of 2011, adhere to due process of law by voluntary collaboration and a precise legislative framework. The study's novelty is in its comparative analysis that distinctly differentiates these two often-confused processes by including doctrinal interpretation and human rights views. This study addresses a deficiency in previous research, which has seldom investigated their normative convergence, and advocates for a more cohesive, rights-based framework for managing offenders within Indonesia's criminal justice system.},
				issn = {2775-619X},		pages = {379--388}			doi = {10.47268/tatohi.v5i8.3304},
				url = {https://fhukum.unpatti.ac.id/jurnal/tatohi/article/view/3304}
		}

RefWorks:

Citation format: Download Citation:

Arief, Supriyadi, Mohamad Hidayat Muhtar, and Geofani Milthree Saragih. ‘Upaya Pembelaan Diri Dalam Perspektif Persamaan Di Hadapan Hukum’. Jurnal Yudisial 16, no. 1 (2023): 25–47. https://doi.org/10.29123/jy.v16i1.475.

Chaniago, Anjani Upik, Ismansyah, and Nani Mulyati. ‘Kepastian Hukum Penggunaan Saksi Mahkota Dalam Pembuktian Pidana Ditinjau Dari Asas Hak Terdakwa Tidak Boleh Mendakwa Dirinya Sendiri (Non Self Incrimination)’. Unes Journal of Swara Justisia 8, no. 4 (2025): 4. https://doi.org/10.31933/sy41r659.

Dewi, Ida Ayu Kade Cinthia, Anak Agung Sagung Laksmi Dewi, and I. Made Minggu Widyantara. ‘Kedudukan Saksi Mahkota Dalam Proses Pembuktian Tindak Pidana di Indonesia’. Jurnal Preferensi Hukum 4, no. 2 (2023): 124–29. https://doi.org/10.22225/jph.4.2.6589.124-129.

Ginting, Yuni Priskila, Anwar Takeshi Oni, Catherine Catherine, Michelle Priscilla Kusuma, Paul Salim, Joice Clarissa, and Wanda Ayu. ‘Sosialisasi Pembuktian Saksi Mahkota Dan Justice Collaborator Dalam Pidana Pembunuhan’. Journal Pengabdian West Science 2, no. 10 (2023).

Harahap, Tuti Khairani, Yuyut Prayuti, Nining Latianingsih, Amsari Damanik, Tiyas Maheni, Ida Farida, Mohamad Hidayat Muhtar, and Mustaqim. ‘Pengantar Ilmu Hukum’. Penerbit Tahta Media, 30 May 2023. https://tahtamedia.co.id/index.php/issj/article/view/255.

Lahmado, Novia Grace, Mohamad Rusdiyanto U. Puluhulawa, and Mohamad Hidayat Muhtar. ‘Tinjauan Viktimologi Terhadap Tindak Pidana Kekerasan Seksual Pada Anak Di Wilayah Hukum Polres Boalemo’. SINERGI: Jurnal Riset Ilmiah 1, no. 6 (2024): 365–75. https://doi.org/10.62335/m4nerb70.

Muhtar, Mohamad Hidayat, Ichlas Tribakti, Agus Salim, Harry A. Tuhumury, M. Hasan Ubaidillah, Suwitno Y. Imran, Iskandar Laka, Geofani Milthree Saragih, Baso Iping, and Fakhry Amin. ‘Konsep Hukum Indonesia’. Global Eksekutif Teknologi, 2023. https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Mohamad-Hidayat-Muhtar/publication/370583612_Sejarah_Tata_Hukum_Indonesia/links/64573db95762c95ac378e471/Sejarah-Tata-Hukum-Indonesia.pdf.

Nassihudin, Abdul Aziz, Tedi Sudrajat, Sri Wahyu Handayani, Aryuni Yuliantiningsih, and Riris Ardhanariswari. Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Law, Governance, and Social Justice (ICoLGaS 2023). Springer Nature, 2023.

Ningsih, Siska Ayu, and Rika Aryati. ‘Kedudukan Hukum Saksi Mahkota Sebagai Alat Bukti Dalam Peradilan Tindak Pidana Korupsi Berdasarkan Undang-Undang No. 8 Tahun 1981 Tentang Kitab Hukum Acara Pidana’. Pagaruyuang Law Journal, no. 0 (2025): 0. https://doi.org/10.31869/plj.v0i0.6178.

Ojulari, Esther. ‘Decolonizing Transitional Justice: A Framework for Historical Reparation for Afro-Descendant Peoples in Colombia’. In the Institute of Commonwealth Studies. Doctoral, School of Advanced Study, 2022. https://sas-space.sas.ac.uk/9953/.

Rismilda, Marisa Aulia. ‘Eksistensi Justice Collaborator Dalam Mengungkap Suatu Tindak Pidana Berdasarkan Sema RI No. 4 Tahun 2011’. Parhesia 1, no. 1 (2023): 92–98. https://doi.org/10.29303/parhesia.v1i1.2573.

Semendawai, Abdul Haris. ‘Penetapan Status Justice Collaborator bagi Tersangka atau Terdakwa dalam Perspektif Hak Asasi Manusia’. Padjadjaran Jurnal Ilmu Hukum (Journal of Law) 3, no. 3 (2016): 468–90.

Sholecha, Ema Mar’ati, Ahmat Saiful, Sheilla Yunika, Hariyanto, and Norhaiden Unsil. ‘Justice Collaborator’s Position and Function on Witness Protection’s Rights as a Suspect from the Perspective of Criminal Law in Indonesia. | EBSCOhost. 1 January 2023. https://doi.org/10.24090/volksgeist.v6i1.7246.

Silalahi, David Hariady. Tinjauan Yuridis Justice Collaborator Dalam Membantu Mengungkapkan Tindak Pidana Korupsi. 7 June 2024. https://repository.uhn.ac.id/handle/123456789/10827.

Syarif, Muhammad, Rizki Ramadhani, Muhammad Aji Wisnu Graha, Tri Yanuaria, Mohamad Hidayat Muhtar, Nur Asmah, Muh Akbar Fhad Syahril, Rizky Dwi Utami, Ahmad Rustan, and Hanry Setiawan Nasution. Metode Metode Penelitian Penelitian Hukum Hukum. Get Press Indonesia, 2024. https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Mohamad-Hidayat-Muhtar/publication/381460823_Metode_Penelitian_Hukum/links/666e76f8de777205a32ff37b/Metode-Penelitian-Hukum.pdf.

Tambunan, Syofia Marlianti. ‘Crown Witnesses in Indonesian Criminal Procedure: A Critical Review of Legal Status and Legitimacy’. Research Horizon 5, no. 2 (2025): 2. https://doi.org/10.54518/rh.5.2.2025.447-456.

Yusuf, Arni, Fence m Wantu, and Mohamad Hidayat Muhtar. ‘Disparitas Putusan Hakim Dalam Tindak Pidana Penipuan dan Implikasinya Terhadap Kepastian Hukum’. SINERGI: Jurnal Riset Ilmiah 2, no. 2 (2025): 2. https://doi.org/10.62335/sinergi.v2i2.923.

Full Text: PDF

Article Metrics

Abstract View grafik

: 70 times
PDF icon PDF

Download : 44 times


Dublin Core		PKP Metadata Items	Metadata for this Document

1.	Title	Title of document	Dissecting the Differences between Crown Witnesses and Justice Collaborators

2.	Creator	Author's name, affiliation, country	Kukun Abdul Syakur Munawar; Miftahul Huda Al Azhar Institute, Kota Banjar; Indonesia

2.	Creator	Author's name, affiliation, country	Filda Vitalia; Brebes Islamic Religious College, Brebes; Indonesia

3.	Subject	Discipline(s)

3.	Subject	Keyword(s)	Crown Witness; Justice Collaborator; Fair Trial.

4.	Description	Abstract	Introduction: This paper thoroughly examines the conceptual and legal distinctions between crown witnesses and justice collaborators within the Indonesian criminal law framework, as well as their ramifications for the concepts of fair trial and the human rights of defendants.Purposes of the Research: This paper aims to thoroughly analyze the legal status, normative foundation, and implications of using these two groups of witnesses within the framework of procedural justice for defendants.Methods of the Research: This research employs normative legal methodologies, utilizing an analytical approach to positive law, Supreme Court jurisprudence, and relevant human rights concepts.Findings of the Research: The research indicates that the crown witness, stemming from prosecution case-splitting, often violates the principle of non-self-incrimination and undermines the rights of the accused. Conversely, justice collaborators, governed by Supreme Court Circular Letter Number 4 of 2011, adhere to due process of law by voluntary collaboration and a precise legislative framework. The study's novelty is in its comparative analysis that distinctly differentiates these two often-confused processes by including doctrinal interpretation and human rights views. This study addresses a deficiency in previous research, which has seldom investigated their normative convergence, and advocates for a more cohesive, rights-based framework for managing offenders within Indonesia's criminal justice system.

5.	Publisher	Organizing agency, location	Faculty of Law, Universitas Pattimura

6.	Contributor	Sponsor(s)

7.	Date	(YYYY-MM-DD)	2025-11-04

8.	Type	Status & genre	Peer-reviewed Article

8.	Type	Type

9.	Format	File format	PDF

10.	Identifier	Uniform Resource Identifier	https://fhukum.unpatti.ac.id/jurnal/tatohi/article/view/3304

10.	Identifier	Digital Object Identifier	10.47268/tatohi.v5i8.3304

11.	Source	Title; vol., no. (year)	TATOHI: Jurnal Ilmu Hukum; Volume 5 Issue 8, October 2025

12.	Language	English=en	en

13.	Relation	Supp. Files	Turnitin (792KB)

14.	Coverage	Geo-spatial location, chronological period, research sample (gender, age, etc.)

15.	Rights	Copyright and permissions	Copyright: Authors who publish their manuscripts in this Journal agree to the following conditions: 1. The copyright in each article belongs to the author, as well as the right to patent. 2. Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgment of its initial publication in this journal. 3. Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work. 4. Authors have the right to self-archiving of the article (Author Self-Archiving Policy) Licence : TATOHI: Jurnal Ilmu Hukum is disseminated based on the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International license terms. This license allows anyone to copy and redistribute this material in any form or format, compose, modify, and make derivatives of this material for any purpose. You cannot use this material for commercial purposes. You must specify an appropriate name, include a link to the license, and certify that any changes have been made. You can do this in a way that is appropriate but does not imply that the licensor supports you or your use. This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License..