Corruption remains a serious issue that hinders development and erodes public trust in the government, particularly in countries like Indonesia and Malaysia. Both nations have long histories of dealing with systemic corruption. This study aims to compare the legal systems and anti-corruption law enforcement in Indonesia and Malaysia to identify challenges and areas for improvement. The research uses a descriptive qualitative method with a Systematic Literature Review (SLR) approach, analyzing legal documents, academic journals, and regulations related to anti-corruption agencies in both countries. This study employs legal system theory and institutional theory. The main problem examined is how anti-corruption law enforcement differs between Indonesia and Malaysia and what the main enforcement challenges are. The findings show that while Indonesia’s Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK) was once powerful, recent political interference and regulatory revisions have weakened its impact. Conversely, Malaysia has more comprehensive legal instruments, but its enforcement agencies struggle with independence and political pressure. In conclusion, both countries must strengthen legal supremacy, institutional independence, and public engagement to enhance the effectiveness of anti-corruption efforts.

Pancasila as a grundnorm plays an important role in the legal political paradigm in Indonesia as the basis for the formation of the legal system. All laws in Indonesia must be based on Pancasila as the source of all legal sources. The main issue studied is the extent to which Pancasila influences the legislative process and legal policies to realize a fair judicial system, as well as how its values can reform the judicial system and improve the quality of law enforcement. This study uses a normative method with a conceptual approach supported by the analysis of the hierarchy theory of legal norms and development law. The results of the study show that although Pancasila has been recognized as a grundnorm in the legal hierarchy, its implementation in legislation and legal policies still often faces obstacles, so a more responsive and inclusive legal system reform based on Pancasila values is needed.