The Authority of Pretrial Judges in Assessing the Authority to Calculate State Financial Losses in Proving the Elements of The Corruption Offence

Misbahul Amin, Setyo Widagdo, Abdul Madjid

Abstract

Pretrial is a court process used to assess the actions of law enforcement in search, seizure, arrest, detention, and suspect determination. The scope of pretrial was expanded after a Constitutional Court decision in 2015. However, there are different interpretations of this decision.   Some pretrial decisions focus on the authority of the institution declaring state financial losses, while others only look at formal evidence without assessing quality. This study aims to determine whether pretrial judges have the authority to assess which institution has the authority to declare state financial losses. The research method used in this research is normative research method through statute approach and case approach. This research concludes that the authority to assess which institution has the authority to declare the existence of state financial losses is included in the subject matter of the case. Based on Supreme Court Regulation No. 04/2016 on Prohibition of Judicial Review of Pre-Trial Decision which states that pre-trial judges only assess the formal aspects, namely related to the fulfilment of 2 (two) evidence and do not enter the subject matter. To ensure consistency in pretrial decisions and legal certainty, a Supreme Court regulation or circular letter should specify the pretrial object and authority for declaring state losses.   A special task force of pretrial judges appointed by the District Court Chief Justice should also be created to handle pretrial decisions and ensure consistency and legal certainty.



Keywords


Pretrial Authority; State Financial Losses; Constitutional Court Decision; Judicial Consistency; Supreme Court Regulation

Full Text:

PDF


References


1. Arief, B. N. (2005). Beberapa Aspek Penegakan dan Pengembangan Hukum Pidana [Some Aspects of Criminal Law Enforcement and Development]. Bandung: Citra Aditya Bakti (in Indonesian).

2. Hutabarat, D. T. H., Fransisca, Z., Ritonga, F., Pardede, D. J., Almas, S., Sikumbang, N. A., Mutiara, Khoiriyah, A., Hamizah, S., Malahayati, & Suryadi. (2021). Understanding And Describing Relationship Of State Law And Human Right. Journal Of Humanities, Social Sciences And Business, 1(1), 65–72. doi: 10.55047/jhssb.v1i1.63

3. Chazawi, A. (2005). Hukum pidana materiil dan formil korupsi di Indonesia [The material and formal criminal law of corruption in Indonesia]. Jakarta: Bayumedia (in Indonesian).

4. Hiariej, E. O. S. (2009). Asas Legalitas & Penemuan Hukum : Dalam Hukum Pidana [The Principle of Legality & Legal Discovery: In Criminal Law]. Jakarta: Erlangga (in Indonesian).

5. Dinda, C. P., Usman, U., & Munandar, T. I. (2021). Praperadilan Terhadap Penetapan Status Tersangka Tindak Pidana Korupsi oleh Komisi Pemberantasan Korupsi [Pretrial against the Determination of Suspect Status of Corruption Crime by the Corruption Eradication Commission]. PAMPAS: Journal of Criminal Law, 1(2), 82–103. doi: 10.22437/pampas.v1i2.9568 (in Indonesian).

6. Firdaus, I., Dewi, A., & Karma, N. (2020). Praperadilan Penetapan Status Tersangka Dalam Dugaan Tindak Pidana Korupsi [Pre-trial Determination of Suspect Status in Alleged Corruption Crime]. Jurnal Analogi Hukum, 2(3), 366–371 (in Indonesian).

7. Marzuki, P. D. M. (2017). Penelitian Hukum [Legal Research]: Bundung: Edisi Revisi (in Indonesian).

8. Kusumastuti, E. (2018). Penetapan Tersangka Sebagai Obyek Praperadilan [Determination of Suspects as an Object of Pretrial]. Yuridika, 33(1), 1. doi: 10.20473/ydk.v33i1.7258 (in Indonesian).

9. Pers, S. (2024, 02 February). BPK Serahkan LHP Penghitungan Kerugian Negara pada LPEI dan Kemenpora kepada Kejaksaan Agung [BPK Submits State Loss Calculation Report on LPEI and Kemenpora to AGO]. Retrieved from https://www.bpk.go.id/news/bpk-serahkan-lhp-penghitungan-kerugian-negara-pada-lpei-dan-kemenpora-kepada-kejaksaan-agung (in Indonesian).

10. Harahap, M. Y. (2007). Pembahasan Permasalahan dan Penerapan KUHAP Penyidikan dan Penuntutan 06675 [Discussion of Problems and Application of the Criminal Procedure Code of Investigation and Prosecution 06675]. Jakarta: Ghalia (in Indonesian).

11. Soekanto, S., & Mamudji, S. (2006). Penelitian Hukum Normatif Tinjauan Singkat [Normative Legal Research Overview]. Bandung: Rajawali Pers (in Indonesian).

12. Aksi-Informasi. (2024, 26 March). White-Collar Crime dan Pola-pola yang Menyertainya [White-Collar Crime and its Patterns]. Retrieved from https://aclc.kpk.go.id/aksi-informasi/Eksplorasi/20240326-white-collar-crime-dan-pola-pola-yang-menyertainya (in Indonesian).


Article Metrics

Metrics Loading ...

Metrics powered by PLOS ALM

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.




Copyright (c) 2024 Misbahul Amin, Setyo Widagdo, Abdul Madjid

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.