The Discretion of Internal Prosecutor Apply in Article 2 & 3 for Law Eradication of Corruption

Imme Kirana, Khairani Khairani, Nani Mulyati

Abstract


The criminal act of corruption is the favorite as if it never gets old, precisely the term extraordinary crime corruption, in addition, the perpetrators of criminal acts of corruption are mostly legal subjects who play a role based on the authority they have. However, it is not uncommon for prosecutors to use the type of subsidiary charge in prosecuting them to determine Article 2 as the primary charge and Article 3 as a subsidiary charge, even though it is clear that the perpetrator has abused their authority and resulted in financial losses to the State. This is a concern for the author to research facultatively on charges of subsidiarity for violations of Article 2 and 3. In this research, the author uses a type of Normative Juridical research, namely legal research that is oriented to secondary data and refers to legal material sources such as Law Number 20 of 2001 Concerning Amendments to Law Number 31 of 1999 concerning Eradication of Corruption Crimes. The results of the research explained that the type of subsidiary indictment by making Article 2 the primary indictment and Article 3 the subsidiary indictment is a form of prosecutorial discretion in eradicating criminal acts of corruption effectively and efficiently so that it is unlikely that the defendant will escape criminal responsibility. Furthermore, Article 3 is the systematic lex specialist of Article 2 of the Corruption Eradication Law, because in criminal acts of corruption, the element "against the law" is the genus, while "abuse of authority" is the species.

Keywords


Corruption; Discretion; Prosecutor; Public.

Full Text:

PDF

References


FNH. (2016). Sekali Lagi, Pasal 2 dan Pasal 3 UU Tipikor. Https://Www.Hukumonline.Com/. https://www.hukumonline.com/

Hiariej, E. O. S. (2021). Asas Lex Specialis Systematis dan Hukum Pidana Pajak. Jurnal Penelitian Hukum De Jure, 21(1), 1. https://doi.org/10.30641/dejure.2021.v21.1-12

Surat Edaran Jaksa Agung RI Nomor: B-4016/F.3/Ft.1/11/2023, (2023).

Komisi Pemberantasan Tindak Pidana Korupsi. (2023). Statistik Tindak Pidana Korupsi Berdasarkan Jenis Perkara.

Korupsi, D. P. dan E. K. P. (2023). Laporan Pelaksanaan Kegiatan Penyidikan 2023.

Manihuruk, T. N. S., Daeng, Y., & Johar, O. A. (2022). Penerapan Peraturan Mahkamah Agung Nomor 1 Tahun 2020 Tentang Pedoman Pemidanaan Pasal 2 Dan Pasal 3 Undang-Undang Pemberantasan Tindak Pidana Korupsi Di Pengadilan Negeri Pekanbaru. Jurnal Ilmiah Penegakan Hukum, 9(2), 162–169. https://doi.org/10.31289/jiph.v9i2.7568

Mestika Zed. (2007). Metode Penelitian Kepustakaan. Yayasan Obor Indonesia.

Monintja, E. S. (2020). Tinjauan Yuridis Pasal 2 dan 3 Undang-Undang Tindak Pidana Korupsi Sebagai Delik Materil Menurut Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi No. 25/PUU/XIV/2016. Lex Crimen, 9(2), 97–105.

Nafirdo Ricky Qurniawan. (2020). Analisis Yuridis Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor 25/PUU-XIV/2016 Mengenai Pasal 2 Ayat (1) dan Pasal 3 Undang-Undang Nomor 31 Tahun 1999 Tentang Pemberantasan Tindak Pidana Korupsi. Journal Trisakti, 1.

Ni Putu Gita Loka Chindiyana Dewi, I Nyoman Sujana, & Luh Putu Suryani. (2021). Koordinasi Wewenang Komisi Pemberantasan Korupsi (KPK) dengan Penegak Hukum Lainnya dalam Melakukan Penyidikan Tindak Pidana Korupsi. Jurnal Preferensi Hukum, 2(1), 119–124. https://doi.org/10.22225/jph.2.1.3056.119-124

Prahassacitta, V. (2018). Perubahan Makna terhadap Pasal Tahun 1999 Pasca Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Amendment to Meaning of Article 2. Journal Konstitusi, 15(3), 503–524.

Roni Efendi. (2021). Kebijakan Hukum Pidana Dalam Pemberantasan Tradisi Omerta Tindak Pidana Korupsi di Indonesia (Hebby Rahmatul Utamy (ed.)). Deepublish Publisher.

Roni Efendi, H. R. (2022). Pembaruan Hukum Acara Pidana di Indonesia. Deepublish Publisher.

Sabani, A., Farah, M. H., & Sari Dewi, D. R. (2019). Indonesia in the spotlight: Combating corruption through ICT enabled governance. Procedia Computer Science, 161, 324–332. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procs.2019.11.130

Setiyawan, W. B. M. (2014). Peran Hakim Dalam Penerapan Pasal 2 Undang-Undang Tindak Pidana Korupsi Pada Dakwaan Subsideritas Atau Dakwaan Alternatif. Jurnal Ratu Adil, 1, 1–13.




DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.30659/ldj.6.2.226-238

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


Law Development Journal has been indexed in: