Publication Search

This study aims to analyze the legal accountability of three judges of the Surabaya District Court who were proven to have been involved in bribery practices during the examination process of a case that resulted in the acquittal of Gregorius Ronald Tannur, the son of Edward Tannur, a former member of the Indonesian House of Representatives from the National Awakening Party (PKB). The study focuses on identifying the forms of legal responsibility that may be imposed on judges who receive bribes, as well as examining the abuse of judicial authority that influenced the issuance of the court decision. This research employs a normative juridical method using a statutory and case approach, through an analysis of Law Number 48 of 2009 on Judicial Power, Law Number 31 of 1999 in conjunction with Law Number 20 of 2001 on the Eradication of Corruption Crimes, Decision of the Surabaya District Court Number 454/Pid.B/2024/PN SBY, and the Joint Decree of the Supreme Court and the Judicial Commission of 2009 concerning the Code of Ethics and Guidelines for Judicial Conduct. The findings indicate that judges proven to have accepted bribes may be subject to criminal sanctions in the form of imprisonment and/or fines, ethical sanctions imposed by the Judicial Commission, as well as administrative sanctions in the form of dishonorable dismissal, and that court decisions rendered by judges involved in bribery may be challenged through available legal remedies. This study underscores the importance of strengthening internal and external oversight mechanisms and enhancing transparency in judicial proceedings to maintain and restore public trust in the judiciary.

Pancasila as the foundation of the state and the national ideology of Indonesia, has a very important function in shaping the moral values, ethics, as well as the attitudes and behavior of state officials. However, the reality of the persistent prevalence of corruption cases reflects a gap between the values contained in Pancasila and the practices of national and state life. This article aims to examine the implementation of Pancasila values in efforts to prevent and address corruption cases in Indonesia. The research method used is a qualitative approach with a literature review method, conducted through an examination of laws and regulations, scientific journals, and various relevant literary sources. The discussion results show that each principle of Pancasila contains anti-corruption values, such as belief in God that instills honesty, humanitarian values that uphold justice, the value of unity that rejects the interests of certain groups, democratic values that emphasize trustworthiness, and the value of social justice for all Indonesian people. However, the implementation of these values has not been carried out optimally due to weak law enforcement and low moral awareness. Therefore, efforts are needed to strengthen Pancasila education, improve the integrity of state officials, and build a collective commitment to realize clean and just governance.

This study focuses on analyzing the welfare index in the ASEAN region (covering six major countries) by comparing two perspectives: objective welfare (Human Development Index/HDI) and subjective welfare (World Happiness Index). Using a balanced panel dataset from 2015–2023, the research applies different econometric approaches for each model, namely the Random Effect Model (REM) for HDI analysis and the Common Effect Model (CEM) for happiness analysis. Empirical findings indicate a striking welfare paradox across the six sample countries. In the objective dimension (HDI), economic stability (GDP) and governance free from corruption (CPI) are proven to be the main positive and significant drivers, while government expenditure (GovExp) shows no meaningful impact, suggesting budget inefficiency. Conversely, in the subjective welfare model, the Easterlin Paradox emerges, as GDP and the corruption index have no significant effect on the happiness index. The happiness levels in these six countries tend to be more influenced by government expenditure. This study concludes that strong economic fundamentals and clean governance free from corruption are essential to building a high quality of human life, whereas citizens’ life satisfaction is more determined by the direct presence of the state through public spending.

This study seeks to examine how the element of state financial loss is applied in corruption cases that originate from private-law relationships, specifically in the context of Micro People’s Business Credit (KUR) financing using the Yarnen Porang scheme, as reflected in Decision Number 41/Pid.Sus.TPK/PN.MTR. The central issue addressed is the manner in which the panel of judges construed and affirmed the existence of a state financial loss that, in substance, arose from a civil act, namely the performance of a financing cooperation agreement between a banking institution and an offtaker. By employing a normative juridical approach and conducting an in-depth analysis of the judicial decision, this research concludes that the alleged state financial loss in the a quo case remains merely prospective in nature and does not satisfy the requirement of an actual and definite loss as mandated by positive law. Furthermore, evidence demonstrating that the financing funds were enjoyed by a third party rather than by the accused indicates a misapplication in attributing criminal liability. Consequently, the criminal prosecution of conduct that is essentially civil in character reflects an expansive interpretation of the state loss element, which is inconsistent with the principle of legality and the doctrine of prudence in the enforcement of corruption laws.

This research examines money politics as a root problem in Indonesia’s democratic system, focusing on the 2019 and 2024 general elections. Money politics refers to the practice of distributing cash or goods by candidates, campaign teams, or volunteers to influence voters’ political choices. This study employs a qualitative method with a literature study approach to analyze several cases that occurred across different regions in Indonesia. The findings reveal that money politics was widespread during both elections, with the main modus operandi involving the distribution of cash, basic goods, and facilities. This practice not only violates the principles of free and fair elections but also undermines citizens’ dignity, weakens popular sovereignty, and serves as a major driver of political corruption. Contributing factors include power ambition, vulnerable economic conditions, low political education, weak oversight, and entrenched transactional political culture. To address this issue, the research highlights the importance of political party reform and strengthening democratic education, particularly through civic education programs. These efforts aim to increase political awareness among citizens and improve the overall quality of Indonesia’s democracy.

The revision of the State-Owned Enterprises (SOE) Law fundamentally changes the concept of SOE losses by emphasizing that losses incurred in SOE operations constitute corporate losses, not state financial losses. This change has a direct impact on the construction of directors' accountability, which has often been associated with corruption when companies experience losses. This study aims to analyze the provisions of SOE directors' responsibilities based on Good Corporate Governance (GCG) principles within the new regulatory framework, as well as to examine the application of sanctions against directors who violate these principles and cause corporate losses. The study uses normative legal methods with statutory, conceptual, and case-based approaches. The analysis was conducted by examining the provisions of the Limited Liability Company Law, the revised SOE Law, related implementing regulations, and several important decisions, such as those concerning Jiwasraya, Asabri, Garuda Indonesia, and Pertamina-TPPI. The results show that the principles of GCG, fiduciary duty, and the Business Judgment Rule are the primary instruments in assessing directors' actions. Civil and administrative sanctions are the first line of defense for assessing directors' accountability, while criminal sanctions can only be imposed if there is an element of abuse of authority, conflict of interest, or other fraudulent acts. This research emphasizes the need for a clear distinction between business risks and unlawful acts to prevent directors from being criminalized for business decisions made in good faith and in accordance with good corporate governance principles. These findings are expected to serve as a reference in formulating state-owned enterprise policies and promoting more proportionate law enforcement against directors.

This study aims to explore the implementation of Standard Operating Procedures for immigration services at TPI Tanjung Priok Port and examine its impact on service effectiveness in Indonesia's maritime sector. The research employed a qualitative approach to analyse the gap between formal SOP guidelines and on-the-ground practices, examining internal and external factors, including resource limitations, technological constraints, and inter-agency coordination issues. The findings reveal significant disparities that lead to both positive and negative discretion amongst frontline Immigration officers, influencing service consistency, efficiency, and transparency. Negative discretion results in procedural deviations that compromise reliability and potentially foster corruption, delays, and inefficiencies. In contrast, positive discretion emerges as adaptive responses indicating weaknesses in SOP design or infrastructure. The study concludes that enhancing frontline officers' competence, motivation, and accountability is essential for achieving desired outcomes, whilst integrating technological solutions such as digital documentation and real-time monitoring is vital for streamlined, transparent, and accountable procedures. Improving SOP adherence, coupled with better resource allocation and inter-institutional cooperation, can significantly reduce vessel turnaround times, lower logistics costs, and bolster maritime competitiveness. The research advocates for dedicated training programmes, supervisory systems, and technological innovations to ensure SOP compliance, minimise discretion-driven deviations, and promote accountability, thereby optimising maritime service delivery and supporting Indonesia's strategic maritime development objectives.

This study seeks to unravel the complexities of applying the doctrine of culpa lata or gross negligence as the basis for criminal liability for state officials in corruption cases, an area that highlights gaps in the criminal law framework which tends to focus on intent. With the rise in corruption cases stemming from misguided strategic decisions that are difficult to prove as intentional, the urgency to explore alternative criminal liability grounds becomes crucial for establishing strong accountability in governance. This research specifically analyzes the application of culpa lata through an in-depth study of Decision Number 68/Pid.Sus-TPK/2025/PN Jkt Pst. Adopting a normative-empirical qualitative case study method, the analysis focuses on the court decision as a single unit of analysis, supported by primary data from the decision document and secondary data from legal literature. Through documentary evidence tracking, it was found that the panel of judges successfully applied the doctrine of culpa lata by identifying elements of negligence such as the disregard for risks that should have been known, subjective asset valuation, and strategic decision-making without adequate study, which causally led to state losses. These findings substantively show that gross negligence can effectively serve as a basis for criminal liability, indicating a shift in the pattern of corruption law enforcement that goes beyond proving mere intent. In conclusion, this study affirms the effectiveness of culpa lata in expanding the scope of criminal liability for state officials, offering theoretical contributions to the understanding of fault elements and practical implications in strengthening public accountability and the potential for corruption prevention through enhanced standards of caution.

The number of corruption cases in Indonesia continues to increase. The termination of the investigation of alleged corruption at the Aceh Truth and Reconciliation Commission by the Banda Aceh City Resort Police based on a Memorandum of Understanding between the Government Internal Supervision Apparatus and Law Enforcement Apparatus raises problems because it is contrary to the Law on the Eradication of Corruption Crimes which emphasizes that the return of state losses does not erase the crime. This inconsistency raises questions about the validity of stopping corruption cases through the Memorandum of Understanding. This study aims to assess the validity of the Memorandum of Understanding between the Government Internal Supervision Apparatus and the Law Enforcement Apparatus as the basis for stopping corruption cases, as well as to outline the legal process that should be taken by the Banda Aceh City Resort Police. This research uses a normative juridical method with a legislative, case, and conceptual approach, based on secondary data from various legal materials. The analysis was carried out in an analytical descriptive manner. The results of the study show that the Memorandum of Understanding between the Government Internal Supervision Apparatus and the Law Enforcement Apparatus cannot be the basis for the termination of corruption cases at the Aceh Truth and Reconciliation Commission because it is only coordinated, not a source of criminal law. The note is only suitable for use to follow up on reports through audits. In addition, the Banda Aceh City Resort Police should continue the case to the investigation stage because the elements of corruption, evidence, as well as elements of mens rea and actus reus have been fulfilled without any justification or excuse. It is suggested that the memorandum of understanding can only be a coordinating guideline, not a basis for stopping corruption cases. Any report must still be processed, and the Banda Aceh City Resort Police are obliged to continue the investigation even though the state losses have been returned.

Law enforcement in the context of recovering state finances does not solely focus on corruption offenses, but also on administrative errors that may potentially cause losses to the state. The State Attorney (Jaksa Pengacara Negara/JPN) holds strategic authority through legal audits to identify, assess, and provide recommendations regarding potential state financial losses arising from administrative actions inconsistent with applicable regulations. This research formulates two main issues: first, how the legal authority of JPN is applied in conducting legal audits on administrative errors potentially causing state financial losses; second, what legal mechanisms are employed by JPN in conducting legal audits on such administrative errors. The findings of this study indicate that the implementation of legal authority by JPN through legal audits aims to ensure that every aspect of authority, procedure, and substance in governmental decision-making, as well as in the procurement of goods and services, complies with legal provisions, starting from the needs identification stage up to the final handover of work results. This is essential for JPN to accurately determine administrative errors that may potentially cause state financial losses and to formulate them in a legal audit report. The mechanism for resolving legal audit findings is carried out through coordination between JPN and the Government Internal Supervisory Apparatus (APIP) to determine the amount of potential losses. Subsequently, JPN provides recommendations to the applicant to return the potential losses to the state or regional treasury.

Legal certainty (rechtssicherheit) is a fundamental pillar of the rule of law, ensuring that legal provisions are clear, consistent, and predictable. In the Indonesian criminal justice system, the Public Prosecutor holds a central position as the Dominus Litis (the owner of the case), determining which cases proceed to court. However, the implementation of prosecutorial authority often leans towards rigid legal positivism, creating a paradox where procedural certainty is achieved at the expense of substantive justice. Disparities in prosecution demands for similar crimes often lead to public distrust and legal uncertainty for justice seekers. This study aims to analyze the challenges in maintaining legal certainty and proposes a strategy to enhance the prosecutor's role through the integration of Restorative Justice and professional discretion. The research employs a normative juridical method with statutory and conceptual approaches, analyzing Attorney General Regulation No. 15 of 2020. The study finds that enhancing legal certainty requires shifting the paradigm from "mechanical prosecution" to "discretionary prosecution" based on conscience. To achieve this, prosecutors must be equipped with high-level cognitive skills to interpret "certainty" not just as textual compliance, but as the consistent application of fairness.

Corruption in Indonesia is not merely a moral transgression but an extraordinary economic crime that depletes national resources. The ultimate objective of corruption eradication, therefore, must be the restoration of state financial losses (asset recovery).  However, the current formulation of the criminal law system specifically Article 18 of Law No. 31 of 1999 contains a critical policy flaw. The provision of "Subsidiary Imprisonment" (Pidana Pengganti) allows convicts to substitute their financial restitution obligations with a disproportionately short prison term. This mechanism inadvertently provides an economic incentive for corruptors to conceal assets and choose imprisonment, resulting in significant state revenue loss. This study aims to critique the current penal policy formulation and propose a comprehensive reformulation of the compensation system. The research employs a normative-juridical method with a statutory and conceptual approach, utilizing the "Economic Analysis of Law" theory to evaluate the efficiency of sanctions. The study argues that the penal policy must shift from a "person-based" approach (in personam) to an "asset-based" approach (in rem). It is imperative to abolish the subsidiary imprisonment option for high-value corruption and implement "Non-Conviction Based Forfeiture" to maximize the recovery of state losses. Furthermore, this policy shift requires law enforcers with high-level cognitive skills to trace complex financial trails.

Corruption continues to be one of Indonesia’s most severe criminal issues, generating substantial financial losses for the state and obstructing the country’s development efforts. Judicial rulings in corruption cases therefore play a vital role in supporting anti-corruption initiatives, both in terms of ensuring fairness and creating a strong deterrent effect. This study evaluates how effective court decisions are in sentencing corruptors in Indonesia by analyzing justice and deterrence dimensions through a socio-legal research approach supported by descriptive analysis. The findings indicate that the effectiveness of judicial decisions remains limited due to disparities in sentencing, lenient punishments that fail to reflect a sense of justice, and the influence of various legal as well as extralegal factors. These issues weaken the credibility of the judicial process and reduce the intended preventive impact of court-imposed sanctions. To enhance effectiveness, the study highlights the need for comprehensive reforms, including clearer sentencing guidelines, improved law enforcement capabilities, and stronger oversight mechanisms to ensure accountability. Overall, this research enhances understanding of the structural challenges within Indonesia’s anti-corruption justice system and proposes recommendations aimed at reinforcing the deterrent value of court decisions through sentencing practices that are more consistent, proportionate, and aligned with the severity of corruption offenses.

This journal examines the criminal act of corruption related to village treasury land (tanah kas desa) in Yogyakarta, with a specific focus on the District Court Decision No. 8/Pid.Sus-TPK/2023/PN Yyk. The objectives are to identify the underlying reasons behind corruption practices, analyze the application of substantive criminal law, and assess the state losses as well as possible preventive measures for future land management. The study employs a qualitative research method through interviews, documentation, and literature review, involving key informants from the judiciary, prosecution office, police sector, and village administration. The findings reveal that corruption in village treasury land is driven by internal factors such as personal motives, economic background, moral integrity, legal awareness, and authority, as well as external factors including non-transparent bureaucracy, ingrained corruption culture, weak supervision, ineffective legal systems, and socio-economic pressures. The application of substantive criminal law is reflected in the assessment of elements of corruption, judicial considerations, and the interplay between legal norms, social impacts, and local wisdom. Furthermore, the study highlights significant economic and social losses, and recommends strategies for prevention, governance improvement, and strengthening accountability to minimize corruption risks in village land management.

This study discusses the shift in the meaning of delinquency in Articles 2 and 3 of the Corruption Crime Law (Corruption Law) which has an impact on law enforcement for corrupt perpetrators. In practice, the element of state losses must be clearly proven so that the perpetrator can be held criminally responsible. However, there is a phenomenon of corrupt perpetrators who return state losses to obscure the elements of loss as stipulated in Article 2 of the Corruption Law, so that they have the potential to escape criminal snare. This research uses a qualitative method with a descriptive analysis approach, through literature studies and studies of the Constitutional Court Decision Number 25/PUU-XIV/2016. The results of the study show that the basis of the applicants' application in the decision is divided into four aspects, namely the authority of the Constitutional Court, the legal standing of the applicant, the object of the application, and the reason for the application. The Constitutional Court judge in the decision considered three main aspects, namely the authority of the Constitutional Court, the legal standing of the applicant, and the subject matter of the application. The judge's legal considerations emphasized that the phrase "may" in Article 2 paragraph (1) and Article 3 of the Corruption Law caused legal uncertainty, so that the nature of the offense in the two articles changed to a formal offense. This has an impact on uncertain and fair legal protection for applicants and has serious implications for law enforcement of corruption crimes in Indonesia.

The Rp 300 trillion tin trade mega-corruption case is one of the largest corruption scandals in the history of Indonesian natural resource management. This study aims to analyze violations of Pancasila principles and ethical governance in the tin trade mega-corruption case, and to identify threats to Indonesian natural resource management. The study uses a qualitative approach with descriptive methods. Data were collected through documentary studies of law enforcement reports, government documents, media reports, and related literature. Data analysis was conducted thematically within the theoretical framework of Pancasila, good governance, and public ethics. The findings indicate that this case violates all of Pancasila's tenets, particularly the second (Just and Civilized Humanity) and fifth (Social Justice for All Indonesian People). There were violations of governance principles including transparency, accountability, participation, the rule of law, and effectiveness. The modus operandi involved collusion between business actors, state officials, and law enforcement officers. The mega-allegations reflect a systemic failure in natural resource management that contradicts the constitutional mandate and Pancasila values. Structural reforms are needed in mining governance, enforcement of the integrity of the apparatus, and public participation in supervision.

The ambiguity of the concept of state economic loss in Article 2 paragraph (1) and Article 3 of the Corruption Crime Law (Tipikor Law) has yet to be defined normatively or by an official institution with the authority to do so. This uncertainty has given rise to legal problems in law enforcement, especially after Constitutional Court Decision No. 25/PUU-XIV/2016, which changed the qualification of corruption offenses to material offenses, so that the proof of economic loss to the state must be actual loss. However, in practice, as in the Surya Darmadi corruption case, law enforcement officials still face difficulties in determining the measure and method of proving economic loss to the state in a lawful manner. The issues in this study are the basis for the judge's consideration of the element of economic loss to the state in the Central Jakarta District Court Decision No. 62/Pid.Sus-TPK/2022/PN.Jkt.Pst and the obstacles and constraints in proving the element of economic loss to the state in criminal acts of corruption.This study uses a normative legal method with a statute approach, a case approach, and a conceptual approach. The results of the study show that the first-level panel of judges assessed that environmental damage and the loss of potential state revenue due to the illegal conversion of forest areas were part of the actual economic loss to the state, while the Supreme Court emphasized the importance of limiting this element to actual loss in accordance with Constitutional Court Decision No. 25/PUU-XIV/2016. The obstacles and constraints in proving the element of state economic loss in corruption crimes stem from internal and external factors that are interrelated and affect the effectiveness of law enforcement.

The return of state financial losses does not eliminate the criminal penalty for perpetrators of corruption. However, differences in the application of Restorative Justice in corruption cases have created legal uncertainty, especially in resolving corruption cases that involve relatively small state financial losses. This study aims to examine and analyze the implementation of Restorative Justice for perpetrators of corruption in the management of village funds, which are often caused by administrative errors, lack of understanding, or weak supervision rather than intentional acts of enrichment. This type of research is Doctrinal, using the statute approach, namely legal research that focuses on the application and interpretation of normative legal provisions (laws and regulations) as well as a theoretical concept approach to understand justice in a restorative framework. The resolution of village fund corruption cases with small losses should ideally prioritize recovery of losses and community restoration, but cannot eliminate the criminal aspect entirely, so clear legal guidelines are needed to ensure fairness and legal certainty.

Corruption in Indonesia has become a systemic and complex issue, posing a threat to economic, social, and political stability. Despite various efforts, including the establishment of the Corruption Eradication Commission and robust law enforcement, Indonesia’s Corruption Perception Index has remained stagnant or declined in recent years. This is primarily due to the inadequacy of conventional audit methods, which struggle to detect complex and hidden corruption schemes. This study examines how the role of investigative audits by the Supreme Audit Agency (BPK) can be optimized through synergy with the Whistleblowing System (WBS) to enhance corruption eradication efforts in Indonesia. Investigative audits, which focus on detecting fraud, are crucial as they can convert audit evidence into legal proof in corruption cases. However, the BPK’s role is often hindered by limited human resources, independence, and weak coordination. Using qualitative research and a literature review, this study analyzes relevant documents, books, scientific journals, and official reports to identify and classify relevant data. The findings indicate that strong synergy between BPK's investigative audits and the WBS is essential. Optimizing these two instruments requires significant reforms, including strengthening whistleblower protection laws, improving inter-agency collaboration, and fostering a robust anti-corruption culture. The study concludes that BPK’s investigative audits are effective in uncovering state losses, but their success depends on follow-up actions and coordination with law enforcement. The WBS can detect corruption early, but its effectiveness is limited by weak whistleblower protection and lack of trust in internal reporting channels.

Digital transformation has fundamentally reshaped the landscape of public service delivery worldwide, with e-government emerging as a critical mechanism for enhancing government efficiency, transparency, and citizen engagement. This article provides a comprehensive analysis of e-government implementation in Indonesia, examining the trajectory of digital transformation in public services, the institutional frameworks supporting this transition, and the multifaceted impacts on service quality and governance outcomes. Through systematic literature review and critical policy analysis, this research explores the evolution of Indonesia's e-government initiatives from early adoption to current comprehensive digital service platforms, investigating both successes and persistent challenges. The findings reveal that Indonesia has made substantial progress in developing e-government infrastructure and applications across national and local government levels, with notable achievements including integrated digital identity systems, online business licensing platforms, and citizen complaint management systems. These initiatives have demonstrably improved service accessibility, reduced processing times, minimized corruption opportunities, and enhanced government responsiveness. However, implementation remains uneven across regions and government institutions, constrained by factors including digital infrastructure disparities, limited digital literacy among citizens and officials, organizational resistance to change, inadequate interoperability between systems, and cybersecurity vulnerabilities. The research identifies critical success factors for effective e-government implementation including strong leadership commitment, adequate resource allocation, comprehensive capacity building programs, citizen-centric design principles, robust legal frameworks, and collaborative partnerships between government, private sector, and civil society.