Hasil Pencarian  ::  Simpan CSV :: Kembali

"Tindak pidana pada awalnya merupakan tindakan yang merugikan keuangan negara. dalam perkembangannya kondisi yang diciptakan akibat tindak pidana korupsi adalah membahayakan keamanan negara, dan akhirnya tindak pidana korupsi menimbulkan bahaya keamanan asimetrik atau non-tradisional yaitu bahaya terhadap keamanan umat manusia, karena dampak negatifnya telah menambah ke dunia pendidikan, kesehatan, penyediaan sandang pangan, keagamaan dan fingsi fungsi pelayanan sosial lainnya.

---

Criminal acts were initially acts that were detrimental to state finances. in its development the conditions created due to criminal acts of corruption are endangering the security of the state, and ultimately corruption acts pose asymmetric or non-traditional security hazards, namely the danger to the security of mankind, because the negative effects have added to the world of education, health, food and religious clothing, religious and function of other social service functions."

"Sudah banyak orang diputus besalah dan dipidana sebagai tindak pidana korupsi Pasal 2 dan Pasal 3 UU PTPK. Namun, apakah pengadilan Tipikor telah mempertimbangan unsur kesalahan secara komprehensif pada pertanggungjawaban pidana. Penelitian ini mengkaji tiga permasalahan hukum, yaitu (1) Bagaimana pengadilan Tindak Pidana Korupsi mempertimbangkan unsur kesalahan pada Pasal 2 dan Pasal 3 UU PTPK dalam putusan-putusannya; (2) Bagaimana perkembangan penafsiran unsur kesalahan dalam rumusan tindak pidana korupsi Pasal 2 dan Pasal 3 UU PTPK; dan (3) Bagaimana parameter untuk menilai unsur kesalahan sebagai dasar pertanggung-jawaban pidana pada Pasal 2 dan Pasal 3 UU PTPK. Metode yang digunakan adalah “Yuridis Normatif” untuk menggali norma hukum dan keputusan pengadilan berdasar ‘library based-study”, dan dilakukan melalui “analytical and critical approach”. Penilaian dan pengujian berdasarkan asas dan teori kesalahan, dan dilakukan melalui model penalaran moralitas “Natural Law”. Hasil penelitian menunjukan, bahwa pengadilan Tipikor cenderung memidana terdakwa tanpa pertimbangan secara komprehensif unsur kesalahan. Lebih kepada keadaan objektif daripada keadaan objektif dan subjektif, yaitu suatu perbuatan yang tidak mengikuti standar dan prosedur administrasi yang dipersyaratkan, dan belum menyentuh pada suatu perbuatan yang bersifat melawan hukum (wederrecchtelijkheid) dan “dengan sengaja” untuk menguntungkan atau memperkaya diri sendiri, orang lain atau suatu korporasi, sehingga negara dirugikan. Meskipun ada hakim menyebutkannya secara aksplisit atau pun implisit dalam pertimbangan hukumnya, akan tetapi belum digali hubungan antara unsur “sengaja” dengan perbuatan yang dilakukan terdakwa, sehingga menimbulkan kerugian keuangan negara. Dengan demikian, asas dan teori Kesalahan yang dikolaborasi dengan model penalaran moralitas “Natural Law” dapat menjadi model ideal (parameter) untuk menilai unsur kesalahan sebagai dasar pertanggungjawaban pidana Pasal 2 dan Pasal 3 UU PTPK. Sebab keadaan objektif dan subjektif menjadi syarat pertanggungjawaban pidana, dan pada model penalaran moralitas “Natural Law” tidak melepas pengujian validitas normatif Pasal 2 dan Pasal 3 UU PTPK guna memperoleh kebenaran dan keadilan.

---

Many people have been convicted and sentenced for criminal acts of corruption in Article 2 and Article 3 of the PTPK Law. However, the Corruption Court has not been able to comprehensively consider the elements of guilt for the crimes committed. This study examines three legal issues, namely (1) How the Corruption Court considers the elements of guilt in Article 2 and Article 3 of the PTPK Law in its decisions; (2) How is the development of the interpretation of the element of guilt in the formulation of the criminal act of corruption of Article 2 and Article 3 of the PTPK Law; and (3) What are the parameters for examining and evaluation of the element of guilt as a basis for criminal responsibility in Article 2 and Article 3 of the PTPK Law. The method used is Doctrinal legal research methodology, also called "black letter" methodology, which focuses on the letter of the law to compose a descriptive and detailed analysis of legal rules found in primary sources (cases and regulations). The purpose of this method is to gather, organize, and describe the law; provide commentary on the sources used; then, identify and describe the underlying theme or system and how each source of law is connected or explore legal norms and court decisions based on library-based studies. The analysis is based on the principles and theory of Criminal Responsibility through the analytical and critical approach to avoid liability without fault and to ensure that "committed intentionally" is the main element used in decision-making regarding corruptor sentencing. Examining and evaluating are based on the "Natural Law" morality reasoning model. This study shows that the judge's decision is more about proving objective facts than subjective facts - or "intentions" of the perpetrators. The corruption court tends to punish defendants without comprehensively considering the elements of guilt or more to an act that does not follow the required administrative procedures and standards and has not yet touched on the concept of an unlawful act and "intentionally" that contributes to losses of the state finances. Even though some judges mentioned it explicitly or implicitly in their legal considerations, however comprehensively consider the elements of guilty yet. Therefore, the principle and criminal responsibility, and collaboration with the models of moral "Natural Law" can become an ideal model of legal reasoning for examining and evaluating the element of guilt as a basis for criminal responsibility under Article 2 and Article 3 of the PTPK Law. In this case, objective and subjective conditions are to examine the validity of Articles 2 and 3 of the PTPK Law to obtain truth and justice."

"Tesis ini membahas tahapan formulasi kebijakan kriminal (politik kriminal) pada masa pemerintahan Presiden Megawati Soekarnoputri dalam upaya memerangi korupsi di Indonesia. Penelitian menggunakan pendekatan kwalitatif dengan disain diskriptif.Hasil penelitian menyimpulkan bahwa formulasi kebijakan kriminal pemerintahan Presiden Megawati Soekarnoputri berupa perundang-undangan dan perangkat hukum yang dibuat sebagai cukup untuk memerangi korupsi, sekaligus menunjukkan keseriusannya. Hasil penelitian menyarankan bahwa produk perundang-undangan dan perangkat turunannya segera diimplementasikan agar dapat diketahui output dan outcome-nya.

---

This thesis to be aimed for discussing phase of a policy formulation (criminal politic) in President Megawati Soekarnoputri era for fighting against corruption in Indonesia. The research used a qualitative approachment with to be completed description desaign.The research shows that policy formulation on criminology in President Megawati Soekarnoputri era consisted of legislation and law sets to be made as something enough and appropriate for fighting against corruption besides of showing its seriousness. The research suggests that production of legislation and its sets have to be implemented as soon as possible to be known output and outcome of it."

"ABSTRAKTindak pidana korupsi sekarang ini sedang marak terjadi tidak hanya di Indonesia, tetapi juga di banyak negara lain. Dalam beberapa kasus tindak pidana korupsi kadang pelakunya melarikan diri ke luar negeri atau menyembunyikan aset hasil tindak pidana korupsinya di luar negeri sehingga untuk penuntasan kasus diperlukan kerja sama internasional, yang salah satu persyaratannya adalah prinsip dual criminality. Tindak pidana korupsi yang utama di Indonesia memiliki unsur ldquo;merugikan keuangan negara rdquo;. Unsur ldquo;merugikan keuangan negara rdquo; tidak diatur dalam UNCAC yang telah diratifikasi Indonesia maupun dalam ketentuan tindak pidana korupsi di banyak negara lain. Melalui penelitian yuridis normatif yang didukung dengan wawancara ingin diperoleh jawaban tentang unsur merugikan keuangan negara ditinjau dari prinsip dual criminality. Dari hasil penelitian dapat disimpulkan bahwa keberadaan unsur ldquo;merugikan keuangan negara rdquo; yang merupakan unsur tertulis dalam ketentuan tindak pidana korupsi di Indonesia, dapat menyulitkan kerja sama internasional, khususnya bila prinsip dual criminality dianut secara mutlak. Namun sejalan dengan semangat pemberantasan korupsi yang telah dianggap sebagai kejahatan transnasional, dual criminality tidak lagi dimaknai secara mutlak. Bahkan UNCAC telah mengatur kerja sama internasional tanpa prinsip dual criminality sepanjang kerja sama internasional dilakukan untuk pencegahan dan pemberantasan tindak pidana korupsi.

---

ABSTRACTCorruption is now happening not only in Indonesia, but also in many other countries. In some cases of corruption, sometimes the corruptor s fled abroad or hide the assets from corruption abroad so that for the completion of the case required international cooperation, which one of the requirements is the principle of dual criminality. The main corruption crime in Indonesia has the element of harm the state 39 s finances . The harm the state 39 s finances is not regulated in UNCAC which has been ratified by Indonesia as well as in terms of corruption in many other countries. Through normative juridical research supported by interviews, writer wants to get answers about the elements of harm the state 39 s finances in terms of dual criminality principle. From the results of the study it can be concluded that the existence of the element harm the state finance which is the element written in the provisions of corruption in Indonesia, can complicate international cooperation, especially when the dual criminality principle is embraced absolutely. But in line with the spirit of corruption eradication that has been considered a transnational crime, dual criminality is no longer interpreted in absolute terms. Even UNCAC has arranged international cooperation without dual criminality principle as long as international cooperation is conducted for prevention and eradication of corruption crime. "

"Hak untuk mendapatkan kepastian hukum yang adil harus dipenuhi dalam melaksanakan penegakan hukum di Indonesia sehingga aparat penegak hukum tidak boleh melanggar hak siapapun dalam menjalankan kewenangannya. Salah satu metode yang melanggar hak seseorang adalah metode penjebakan dalam tindak pidana korupsi. Metode penjebakan dalam tindak pidana korupsi tidak memiliki ketentuan dalam ketentuan khusus tindak pidana korupsi dan metode tersebut melanggar ketentuan yang diatur dalam Pasal 28 D Undang-Undang Dasar Negara Republik Indonesia sehingga pertimbangan seorang hakim diharapkan dapat menilai metode tersebut dengan cermat. Metode penjebakan ditemui dalam putusan Nomor 03/PID.B /TPK/2005/PN. JKT.PST dan Nomor 34/Pid.Sus-TPK/2020/PN. Bdg disertai dengan pertimbangan hakim yang berbeda. Berdasarkan hal tersebut, tulisan ini akan menganalisis mengenai pertimbangan hakim pada kedua kasus tersebut terhadap pelaksanaan metode penjebakan dalam tindak pidana korupsi.

---

The right to obtain fair legal certainty must be ensured in the enforcement of law so the officials must not violate anyone's rights in carrying out their authority. One method that violates an individual's rights is the entrapment method in corruption offenses. The entrapment method in corruption offenses is unregulated for specific provisions of corruption offenses, and this method violates the rules stipulated in Article 28D of the UUD RI 1945, thus requiring a judge's careful assessment of such a method. The entrapment method found in the verdict with Case Number 03/PID.B/TPK/2005/PN. JKT.PST and Case Number 34/Pid.Sus-TPK/2020/PN. Bdg, accompanied by different considerations from the judges. Based on these issues, this paper will analyze the judges' considerations regarding implementation of entrapment method in corruption offenses."