Publication Search

Social crimes at the village level require participatory and sustainable prevention approaches. This study aims to analyze the synergy between the Sidoarjo Police Resort through its BINMAS unit and the residents of Waruberong Village in implementing the “4D” anticipation framework (Corruption, Narcotics, Bullying, and Sexual Harassment). A descriptive qualitative method was employed, utilizing data collection through observation, semi-structured interviews, and documentation analysis of socialization activities and police-community forums. The results indicate that this partnership successfully shifts the security paradigm from a reactive enforcement model toward proactive collaboration grounded in education and early reporting. BINMAS functions effectively as an administrative liaison, coordinating Senkom Mitra Polri, village officials, and residents, thereby standardizing and streamlining report handling processes. The implementation of the 4D framework significantly enhances public legal literacy, strengthens trust in the DUMAS Presisi system, and encourages active community participation in security patrols and awareness campaigns. Although minor administrative challenges, such as limited reporting literacy and fluctuating attendance, were identified, they can be mitigated through structured mentoring. Overall, the 4D-based partnership model proves highly relevant for strengthening participatory security ecosystems at the village level. This study recommends standardizing educational modules, providing continuous administrative training for Senkom members, and integrating digital reporting platforms to ensure the program's long-term sustainability.

Corruption cases in Indonesia often involve the recovery of state assets, including properties encumbered by mortgages (hak tanggungan). This research conducts a normative legal analysis on how current law treats such pledged assets when they become objects of state confiscation in corruption crimes. We examine Indonesian legislation (especially the Tipikor Act, TPPU Act, and Mortgage Act), judicial practice, and principles of justice and legal certainty. The Bank Perumda BPR Purworejo case is used as an illustrative case study: here fictitious loans and misused collateral led to state losses of hundreds of millions of rupiah, and investigators seized assets (including four mortgaged properties) as evidence. The analysis finds that existing rules inadequately protect good-faith creditors: courts have noted that a corruption verdict does not automatically erase a prior mortgage lien, and that a certified mortgage confers a preferential right equal to a judgment. In practice, however, law enforcement often seizes all assets of the convict without first verifying third-party rights, creating legal uncertainty and perceived injustice. We argue that fair outcomes require stricter safeguards for creditors (e.g. mandatory review of collateral status before seizure) and consideration of equitable principles. In conclusion, we recommend legal reforms or guidelines to balance the state’s recovery goals with protection of bona fide mortgagees, so as to uphold substantive justice while maintaining legal certainty.

This article aims to analyze the urgency of criminal law policy reform toward corruption crimes in the digital era and to examine the direction of legal renewal needed in the national legal system. The method used is normative legal research with statutory, conceptual, and library approaches. The results indicate that the development of information technology has transformed corruption patterns from conventional forms into more systematic, concealed, transnational, and electronically facilitated digital corruption. In this context, Indonesian criminal law policy still faces obstacles in the form of disharmony between the Anti-Corruption Law, the Electronic Information and Transactions Law, and Law Number 1 of 2023 concerning the Criminal Code. Criminal law reform is needed through strengthening the criminalization of digital-based corruption, expanding corporate criminal liability, modernizing electronic evidence, and synchronizing law enforcement institutions. In conclusion, criminal law policy reform is an urgent necessity so that corruption eradication can adapt to the challenges of the digital era.

This study aims to analyze the laws and regulations related to the granting of rehabilitation by the president in relation to corruption committed by former ASDP directors, which has been declared to have caused financial losses to the state amounting to Rp.1.25 trillion. The researcher conducted research using normative legal research methods with a legislative approach and a case approach. Legal sources were obtained from primary, tertiary, and secondary sources related to the legal analysis of the president in granting rehabilitation to former directors of ASDP Indonesia Ferry. The researchers identified two research questions:  what considerations did the president take into account in granting rehabilitation to the former director of ASDP Indonesia Ferry, and what are the legal consequences of granting rehabilitation to the former director of ASDP Indonesia Ferry. In granting rehabilitation, the president must seek the opinion of the Supreme Court. The granting of rehabilitation by the president is based on the aspirations of the people as conveyed to the House of Representatives and must be proven not to be detrimental to state finances. One judge disagreed because he considered it to be purely a business mistake.   Keywords: Rehabilitation, Corruption Crimes, ASDP

The purpose of this writing is to analyze Article 14 of Law Number 31 of 1999 jo. Law Number 20 of 2001 concerning the Eradication of Corruption has a delegative character, because its enactment depends on the provisions of other laws that expressly declare a violation as a criminal act of corruption. The construction of these norms in practice gives rise to ambivalence in law enforcement, especially when various acts that are detrimental to state finances occur in strategic sectors that are not explicitly qualified as corruption crimes in sectoral laws. This condition has the potential to create a legal vacuum and hinder the effectiveness of eradicating corruption as an extraordinary crime. This study aims to analyze the practice of implementing Article 14 of the Law on the Eradication of Corruption and examine these provisions from the perspective of legal certainty, justice, and criminal law policy. The research method used is normative legal research with a legislative approach and a case approach. Research data was obtained through literature studies on primary, secondary, and tertiary legal materials that were analyzed qualitatively. The results of the study show that the delegative and limiting nature of Article 14 has implications for the low predictability of the law and opens up ambivalence between norms and law enforcement practices. In reality, law enforcement officials often apply the Corruption Crime Law to acts that are normatively outside the scope of Article 14, taking into account the existence of state financial losses and the interests of substantive justice. Therefore, Article 14 needs to be interpreted systemically and progressively and supported by the reformulation of norms and harmonization of laws and regulations to be in line with the dynamics and complexity of modern corruption crimes.

Money laundering is a derivative crime that is frequently associated with corruption and has the potential to cause significant losses to state finances. Efforts to recover assets derived from criminal activities constitute an essential aspect of law enforcement aimed at restoring state losses and creating a deterrent effect for perpetrators. This study aims to analyze the authority of public prosecutors in the investigation of money laundering crimes as well as the mechanisms for state asset recovery based on the authority of the Indonesian Attorney General’s Office. The research method employed is normative juridical research using statutory and case approaches. The results of this study indicate that the Attorney General’s Office possesses clear and legally valid authority to conduct investigations into money laundering crimes as regulated under Law Number 8 of 2010 concerning the Prevention and Eradication of Money Laundering and the Law on the Attorney General’s Office. Prosecutors are authorized to trace, seize, confiscate, and recover assets derived from criminal acts without first proving the predicate offense. This study further emphasizes that although the authority of the Attorney General’s Office has been normatively regulated, in practice, state asset recovery continues to face various obstacles, both in substantive and procedural law, such as inconsistencies in statutory regulations and the suboptimal implementation of non-conviction-based asset forfeiture. Therefore, strengthening regulations and harmonizing legal policies are necessary to ensure that state asset recovery through the handling of money laundering crimes can be carried out more effectively and provide legal certainty.

This study examines the distortion between civil and criminal perspectives in the legal considerations (ratio decidendi) of Judex Juris in Supreme Court Decision Number 121K/Pid.Sus/2020. The decision lacks substantial criminal law considerations regarding the alleged corruption offense. Instead, the legal reasoning focuses on the fault or negligence of company directors, particularly the exception under Article 97 of Law Number 40 of 2007 concerning Limited Liability Companies, which embodies the Business Judgment Rule doctrine. Furthermore, these considerations are distorted by tort (onrechtmatige daad) as regulated in Article 1365 of the Civil Code juncto Article 138 paragraph (1) letter b of the Company Law. This research employs a legislative approach by analyzing various legal instruments, including the 1945 Constitution, the Criminal Code, the Criminal Procedure Code, the Limited Liability Company Law, State-Owned Enterprises Law, Judicial Power Law, Supreme Court Law, and the Corruption Eradication Laws. A conceptual approach is also utilized to examine theoretical concepts concerning corporate crime, directors' liabilities, state losses, tort, negligence from criminal and civil perspectives, business judgment rules, collective collegiality principles, and formal-material classification of legislation. The data comprises primary legal materials (legislation and court decisions) and secondary legal materials (legal literature and scientific journals). Analysis is conducted qualitatively by interpreting legal principles and their relevance to the court's considerations in the decision.

This study explores the phenomenon of abuse of authority in the investigation stage of corruption cases, focusing on various violations of practices, causative factors, and implications for justice and legal certainty. The study uses a normative juridical approach through the study of laws and regulations, legal doctrine, and empirical literature to build a comprehensive and systematic analysis. The findings indicate that oversight gaps, weak institutional control, and low integrity of the authorities are the main triggers for actions that go beyond authority, which in turn reduces the effectiveness of evidence and lowers public trust in law enforcement institutions. In addition, the lack of transparency and accountability mechanisms further exacerbates the risk of procedural violations during the investigation process. These conditions can potentially undermine the principles of due process of law and fairness in the criminal justice system. To address this problem, it is necessary to improve internal and external control mechanisms, strengthen supervision by independent institutions, and ensure the consistent implementation of disciplinary measures and legal sanctions against violators. By reinforcing these efforts, it is expected that law enforcement agencies can enhance professionalism, maintain integrity, and restore public confidence in handling corruption cases. (Soekanto & Mamudji, 2020; KUHAP; Corruption Law).

This study discusses the function of corporate criminal liability for State-Owned Enterprises (SOEs), particularly SOEs, by examining a case of corruption in the sale of commodities at Perum Bulog Jakarta in 2022-2023, which caused financial losses to the state amounting to approximately IDR 7.192 billion. This case illustrates the abuse of authority by SOE officials, which not only reflects individual violations but also is a symptom of weaknesses in the culture of internal control and compliance in state-owned companies. The purpose of this study is to examine the regulation and application of the principle of corporate criminal liability in State-Owned Enterprises (SOEs) with reference to Law Law Number 31 of 1999 in conjunction with Law Number 20 of 2001 concerning Eradication of Corruption Crimes, the latest Criminal Code (Law Number 1 of 2023), and Supreme Court Regulation Number 13 of 2016. The method used is normative legal research with a juridical approach, which focuses on the review of legislation, the concept of corporate criminal liability, and the analysis of related court decisions. The results of the study show that acts of corruption involving Bulog have fulfilled the elements of corporate criminal liability, because they were carried out in the exercise of official authority and were intended for the benefit of the institution. The application of the provisions in the new Criminal Code, particularly Articles 45 to 47 and Article 118, confirms the position of corporations as legal subjects in the criminal law system. The implications of this research highlight the need to strengthen the Good Corporate Governance (GCG) system in SOEs and the need for consistent enforcement of corporate criminal liability by law enforcement officials to ensure justice, transparency, and the prevention of structural corruption in Indonesia.  

Based on article (Shelley, 2010) Human Trafficking is the act of recruiting, transporting, transferring, harboring, or receiving individuals through force, fraud, or corcecion for the purpose of exploiting them profit. This exploitation may include forced labor, sexual slavery, or other forms of commercial sexual exploitation. It is considered a serious violation of human rights and includes a form of modern slavery, a crime against humanity. Human trafficking is a global threat that requires serious attention and real action. Factors such as poverty, political instability, and lack of public awareness make human trafficking increasingly difficult to eradicate. Therefore, there is a need for international cooperation, government, and community cooperation to prevent, protect, and recover victims of human trafficking. Human trafficking is a serious crime that continues to grow, including in Cambodia, which is vulnerable due to geographical and socioeconomic factors. This study aims to analyze the handling of human trafficking cases in Cambodia from the perspective of international legal policy. Sexual exploitation, forced labor, and organ trafficking are the main forms of this crime. Although Cambodia has adopted various laws, its implementation is still hampered by limited resources, corruption, and weak cooperation between countries. International community support such as the Palermo Protocol has helped, but law enforcement remains inconsistent. This study emphasizes the importance of stricter law enforcement and an adequate rehabilitation system for victims. Collaboration between governments and NGOs is urgently needed to create effective solutions and better protection for victims of human trafficking.

Corporate crime in the natural resources sector is a legal phenomenon that has a broad impact on state finances and public interests. This article analyzes the legal case of tin trade corruption involving PT Timah Tbk, a state-owned enterprise managing a strategic commodity. This study aims to examine the construction of corporate crime and the legal implications of state financial losses arising from deviant trade practices. The research method used is normative legal research with a juridical-analytical approach through a review of laws and regulations, legal doctrine, and relevant legal facts. The results of the study indicate that tin trade corruption is a systemic corporate crime integrated into the company's policies and business mechanisms, so that criminal liability cannot be limited to individuals alone. The resulting state losses are multidimensional, including fiscal losses, loss of potential revenue, and violations of the principle of state control over natural resources. This study emphasizes the importance of strengthening corporate criminal law enforcement to maintain the integrity of state-owned enterprises and protect state interests.

Remission constitutes a right granted to inmates who meet specific requirements as a form of recognition for good behavior during imprisonment. This study aims to examine the requirements for granting remission to correctional inmates and analyze the societal impacts when remission is given to convicts of corruption, terrorism, and narcotics offenses. The research employs a normative juridical approach through a literature study. The findings demonstrate that remission possesses a clear legal foundation encompassing both general and specific requirements, particularly for perpetrators of serious crimes. General requirements include serving at least six months of imprisonment, demonstrating good behavior, and actively participating in guidance programs. For special crime perpetrators, additional requirements apply, including becoming justice collaborators, paying fines and compensation, and participating in deradicalization programs. However, granting remission to special crime convicts generates negative impacts on public perception of justice, deterrence effects, and the integrity of law enforcement. The research concludes that a more selective and accountable remission policy supported by public oversight is necessary to align with the objectives of correctional guidance and legal justice.

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.

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.

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.

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 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.

Law Number 31 of 1999 in conjunction with Law Number 20 of 2001 concerning Eradication of Corruption Crimes (Tipikor Law) requires the existence of state financial losses as an important element in Article 2 paragraph (1) and Article 3. Following Constitutional Court Decision No. 25/PUU-XIV/2016, proof of state losses must be actual losses, rather than potential losses. However, in practice, there is a discrepancy between legal norms and the reality of law enforcement, especially in state-owned enterprises (SOEs) engaged in banking. There is disharmony between the Anti-Corruption Law, the State Finance Law, and the SOE Law, particularly regarding the financial status of SOEs as separate state assets. This study uses a normative legal method with a statute approach. The results show that proving state financial losses in banking SOEs related to corruption requires an examination by an authorised institution to declare state financial losses. Based on Article 10 paragraph (1) of Law No. 15 of 2006 concerning the Audit Board, it is explained that the Audit Board has the authority to determine the existence or absence of state losses. The audit process carried out by the Audit Board on state-owned banking enterprises suspected of causing state financial losses must be an investigative audit process, not a state loss calculation audit that is usually carried out on government institutions.

White-collar crime has evolved to a transnational scale, transcending national boundaries. The crimes are increasingly sophisticated and well-organized, making them difficult to detect and eradicate effectively. Criminals continually seek to secure their proceeds through various means, including complex schemes of money laundering involving international financial networks. To enforce the law on money laundering, proof of the occurrence of money laundering is necessary. Therefore, prior to carrying out the investigation, several key elements must be understood, including the basic concepts of money laundering, the methods of money laundering, and indirect methods of evidence. The crime of money laundering is based on Law No. 15 of 2002 and has been carried out in accordance with the applicable provisions, namely Law No. 8 of 1981 concerning the Criminal Procedure Code (KUHAP), and the Procedural Law contained in Law No. 15 of 2002 concerning the Crime of Money Laundering as amended by Law No. 25 of 2003 concerning Amendments to Law No. 15 of 2002 concerning the Crime of Money Laundering. Obstacles that arise in investigating money laundering crimes can be categorized into two categories: legal and non-legal. Legal obstacles include provisions on bank secrecy, investigators' obligations to protect reporters and witnesses, investigators' incomplete perceptions of money laundering, and incomplete information from the Financial Transaction Reports and Analysis Center (PPATK). Non-legal obstacles include reporters not necessarily being victims, limited human resource capacity of investigators, lack of adequate facilities, minimal public awareness, insufficient institutional coordination, and technological gaps that hinder optimal enforcement efforts.