Publication Search

Corruption is one of the criminal acts that has a destructive impact on development and public trust. In an effort to strengthen the eradication of corruption, impoverishment punishment is proposed as a progressive approach that aims to provide a deterrent effect and restore state losses. This study aims to analyze the effectiveness of the application of impoverishment punishment in handling corruption in Indonesia. The method used is a juridical-sociological approach, by examining applicable regulations and the impact of their application in practice.The results of the study show that impoverishment punishment has great potential in reducing corruption rates, especially with the confiscation of assets from crime which can reduce the motivation of perpetrators to commit corruption. However, the implementation of this punishment faces various challenges, including the lack of regulatory synchronization, technological limitations in asset tracking, and political resistance. This study recommends strengthening regulations, increasing the capacity of financial forensic technology, and public education to support the effective implementation of impoverishment punishment. With the right strategy, impoverishment punishment can be one of the key instruments in building a stronger and more equitable corruption eradication system.

This study discusses the interpretation of verses of the Qur'an related to the illegal taking of other people's property, especially in the context of the confiscation of corruptor assets, based on the views of Muhammad Quraish Shihab (Tafsir Al-Misbah), Hamka (Tafsir Al-Azhar), Ibn Kathir (Tafsir al-Qur'an al-'Azhim), and Wahbah Zuhaili (Tafsir al-Munir). This study uses a qualitative method with a library research approach to conceptually examine various things that are correlated with corruption from the perspective of the Qur'an. Therefore, this study is a type of qualitative and thematic research through literature review, namely by writing, reducing, and presenting data and analyzing it, as well as the theory of maqashid sharia and jinayah. The results of the study show that the commentators support the confiscation of corruptors' assets as a legitimate action in Islam, by the principles of maqashid al-syariah, especially the protection of property (hifz al-mal). Quraish Shihab emphasizes the importance of asset confiscation to restore justice and protect society. Hamka sees this action as a just punishment that also restores the rights of society. Ibn Kathir emphasizes that corruption must be punished strictly to prevent greater damage. Wahbah Zuhaili emphasizes the authority of the government in upholding justice and preventing injustice, including through the confiscation of illegal assets. This interpretation provides a strong theological basis for the policy of asset confiscation as part of the enforcement of Islamic law, emphasizing that such action is necessary to maintain balance and stability in society.  

According to Law Number 37 of 2004 tates that bankruptcy is general confiscation of assets of bankrupt debtor. Those failure to pay debtors commonly beacause of a strain in company's financial condition. The purpose of imposition of bankruptcy is to protect both bankrupt debtor and creditors. In the development of bankruptcy in Indonesia, the regulation of Insolvency test in imposing companies bankruptcy, especially companies with legal status, has not been regulated in Law No. 37 of 2004. Insolvency is the failure to done a financial responsibility in the due date as is appropriate in a company, or the excess of liabilities over assets within certain time. If the debtor has been declared insolvent, the debtor is completely bankrupt and properties will soon be divided. There also has no provision stating that Insolvency Test is a condition for bankrupting a debto. Regulation absence regarding Insolvency Test certainly cause problems for companies that many Indonesia’s companies experience legal bankruptcy. Therefore, author feels it is necessary to do a research related to Insolvency Test which was once applicable in Indonesian Bankruptcy Law, but no longer used, even though the application of Insolvency Test is very helpful for the judge's view in deciding individual or legal entity in a state of bankruptcy in court, and further clarifies the objectivity in bankruptcy judgment.    

Regulated asset confiscation​ in criminal acts of corruption based on Article 18 paragraph (1) of Law Number 20 of 2001 concerning the Eradication of Corruption Crimes. A form of asset confiscation without punishment as an alternative to giving justice for the state and perpetrators of criminal acts of corruption consists of an asset confiscation system using the Non Conviction Based Asset Forfeiture model and implementing the mandate of UNCAC as the State. The establishment of legal rules regarding confiscation of assets without punishment as an alternative to providing justice for the state and perpetrators of criminal acts of corruption in realizing a welfare state, at least taken in several progressive legal steps, namely improving statutory regulations, strengthening coordination between law enforcement agencies, and speed up the completion of the Asset Return Law.    

The purpose of writing this journal is to identify and analyze the ways and motives behind corrupt acts carried out by corporations, as well as understand the organizational structure and market dynamics that influence these corrupt practices. And evaluate the legal consequences that apply to corporations involved in acts of corruption and examine the effectiveness of implementing these penalties in efforts to prevent and overcome corruption among corporations. The approach method used in this research is Normative Law (normative juridical) using a statutory approach, a conceptual approach, and a comparative and empirical approach (field data). The research results show that corporations are involved in acts of corruption through various, often complex and covert means, driven by motives to increase profits, dominate markets, or avoid regulations. The mechanisms they use range from giving bribes, manipulating tenders, to money laundering practices. Corporations involved in acts of corruption can face a number of legal consequences, ranging from heavy fines, license revocation, asset confiscation, to operational restrictions. Although these penalties are intended to provide a deterrent effect, their effectiveness in preventing corporate corruption often varies. While fines may have a financial impact, without significant internal changes in corporate culture and governance, the potential for a return to corrupt behavior remains.

This study aims to determine the criminal law policy in the return of state financial losses in the form of replacement payments by corruption convicts and to determine the efforts made by police investigators in overcoming obstacles to the return of state financial losses in the form of replacement payments by corruption convicts. The method used in this study is a qualitative method, with a normative legal approach as the main approach and empirical legal as a supporting approach. The data sources in this study were obtained from secondary data as the main data and primary data as supporting data. Furthermore, the data were then processed using qualitative methods. The results of the study obtained information that the criminal payment of replacement money has been regulated in Law No. 31 of 1999 concerning the Eradication of Corruption as amended by Law No. 20 of 2001. The amount of replacement money payment is the same as the assets obtained from the crime of corruption. If the replacement money is not paid, the convict is sentenced to imprisonment for a period not exceeding the maximum threat of the principal sentence. Therefore, the return of state financial losses cannot be optimal. The amount of compensation for state financial losses needs to be increased, by confiscating and seizing the perpetrator's assets/wealth. The Asset Confiscation Law needs to be formed as a legal basis for confiscating assets from corruption.

Confiscation of assets regulated in criminal acts of corruption is based on Article 18 paragraph (1) of Law Number 20 of 2001 concerning Eradication of Corruption Crimes. The form of asset confiscation without punishment as an alternative to providing justice for the state and perpetrators of criminal acts of corruption consists of an asset confiscation system using the Non Conviction Based Asset Forfeiture model and implementing the mandate of UNCAC as the State. The establishment of legal rules regarding confiscation of assets without punishment as an alternative to providing justice for the state and perpetrators of criminal acts of corruption in realizing a welfare state, at least taken in several progressive legal steps, namely improving statutory regulations, strengthening coordination between law enforcement agencies, and accelerating finalize the Asset Recovery Act.