In the proof of corruption, the use of crown witnesses is often done, because of
corruption cases often involve more than 2 (two) defendants. A witness who was also once
accused shall give testimony for the other defendants. Judicial review of witness protection in
criminal acts of orruption need to be addressed are complex and the overall deterrent effect not
only on the perpetrators of corruption, but also for people to know that if they declared or as a
witness or complainant in a corruption case, they will obtain a protection from law enforcement
officials. The purpose of this law is to know the implementation of legal protection of a crown
witness in the corruption and constraint in the implementation of legalprotection of a crown
witness in the corruption.
Research location in the city of Yogyakarta with the subject of research in the District
Court, Yogyakarta. Data was collected by way of literature study, and documentation. The data
in this study were analyzed with descriptive methods, ie data obtained from primary and
secondary data are described in a systematic and logical deductive pattern according to, and
then explained, translated, and integrate based on scientific principles.
Conclusion of the study, the form of protection for witnesses in criminal acts of
corruption, in practice carried out by the witness was not present at the time of the trial and
should not be hidden identity of witnesses known to the public. The existence of Law No. 13 of
2006 on Protection of Witnesses and Victims, better ensure the protection of witnesses, but
within the law in fact has not been effectively implemented. Constraints on the implementation of
witness protection in criminal acts of corruption is, the witness resides outside the city, it is
difficult to disguise the identity of witnesses, as well as in the Witness Protection Act and the
Victims still there are some weaknesses
