Home All

The Urgency of Perma No. 1 of 2020 as a Solution to Disparity in Corruption Decisions | merdeka.com


Merdeka.com – Lex Semper Dabit Remidium sourced from the adage that the law will always give medicine, so all the regulations made are intended as a solution to solve various existing social problems and so that there is still social control over the procedures for behaving and acting so that they remain organized, in harmony, and in accordance with existing norms. . Optimization of laws and regulations is also needed to reduce the crime rate. One of the regulations that need special attention to be implemented more optimally is regarding the Eradication of Criminal Acts Corruption.

When other nations continue to compete to build their country’s industry, education and infrastructure, we are still lying weak and helpless to be undermined corruption. Nowadays, corruption in Indonesia is one of the causes of the decline of the nation’s economic system. This is because corruption in Indonesia occurs systemically and widely so that it is not only detrimental to the state’s financial condition, but also violates the social and economic rights of the community at large.

The anti-corruption non-governmental organization Indonesia Corruption Watch (ICW) released a Report on the Trends of Enforcement of Corruption Cases in Semester 1 2021. Based on data collected by ICW, the number of prosecutions for corruption cases during the first six months of 2021 reached 209 cases. This number increased compared to the same period in the previous year, which was 169 cases. ICW also said that the value of state losses due to corruption has also increased. In semester 1 2020, the value of state losses from corruption cases amounted to Rp. 18.173 trillion, then in semester 1 of 2021 the value reached Rp. 26.83 trillion. In other words, there was an increase in the value of state losses due to corruption by 47.6 percent. In the past four years, the value of state losses has always shown an increasing trend, while the number of prosecutions for corruption cases has fluctuated.

As we know that when everyone is holding back during the pandemic to do this and that. In fact, some of our politicians and officials are still eager to continue to commit corruption. This does not reduce the lust of greedy officials who have no self-respect. The Minister of Maritime Affairs and Fisheries together with several special staff and ministry officials asked for cash back from each exported lobster seed. They use their money to buy luxury goods just when most of us are desperately trying to make ends meet. Then what is even more concerning are the officials of the Ministry of Social Affairs along with their ministers at once. Instead, they pointed at the vendors with cash back. They asked for IDR 10,000 from each social assistance package. Packages worth Rp. 300,000 were cut off for their own enjoyment.

The case of corruption during the pandemic proves that the moral condition of our politicians and officials is indeed at its lowest point, even a pandemic that has tormented many people does not affect the person to refrain from enriching himself. Until recently, the most concerning thing was the news that a corruption suspect of 150 M in Bengkulu was inaugurated as a village head. This is the reality. Their morals have become so bankrupt, indeed we are not surprised, but it is very natural and deserves for us to be disappointed and angry.

According to Sarlito W. Sarwono, there are two things that can be used as the cause of corruption, namely encouragement from within oneself (desire, desire, will, and so on) and stimulation from outside (environmental factors, opportunities, lack of control and so on). Basically, corruption itself always brings consequences. The negative consequences of systemic corruption on the process of democratization and sustainable development are:

1. Corruption delegitimizes the democratic process by reducing public trust in the political process through money politics.
2. Corruption distorts decision-making on public policy. Creates a lack of public accountability, and negates the rule of law. Law and bureaucracy only serve to power and owners of capital.
3. Corruption eliminates the system of promotion and punishment based on performance due to patron-client relationships and nepotism.
4. Corruption causes development projects and public facilities of low quality and does not match the needs of the community so that it interferes with sustainable development.
5. Corruption causes the collapse of the economic system due to uncompetitive products and the buildup of foreign debt burdens.

Indeed, the perpetrators of criminal acts of corruption may not be sentenced to imprisonment, but are sentenced to impoverishment or criminal penalties in the form of an obligation to work for perpetrators of corruption, whose salaries are deposited into the state treasury. This is based on the consideration that many of the perpetrators of corruption crimes are highly educated and have extensive experience, so that if they are in prison they do not produce results.

2003 United Nations (UN) Convention Against Corruption United Nations Convention Against Corruption (UNCAC) 2003, described that the problem of corruption has become a serious threat to the stability, security of the national and international community, has weakened institutions, democratic values ​​and justice and endangered sustainable development and law enforcement. With the many influences caused by the rise of corruption cases, strategic measures to eradicate corruption must be carried out immediately.

In my opinion, the conditions for imposing the death penalty on perpetrators of criminal acts of corruption must be changed to become wider. This is based on the consideration that if the conditions for imposing the death penalty for criminal acts of corruption are more broadly regulated, then the death penalty for perpetrators of criminal acts of corruption will be easily imposed/imposed. Thus, the deterrent effect on the perpetrators of corruption as well as individuals who want to commit a criminal act of corruption will run according to the expectations of the eradication of corruption.

Corruption is already deeply rooted in Indonesia. This can be seen from the cases of corruption which are still high on the graph. Its development continues to increase from year to year, both in terms of the number of cases that occur and the amount of state financial losses as well as in terms of the quality of criminal acts that are carried out more systematically and in scope that enters all aspects of people’s lives. All efforts have been made by the government in eradicating criminal acts of corruption that are currently occurring in Indonesia, one of which is the existence of Law 31 of 1999 as amended by Law Number 20 of 2001 concerning the Eradication of Criminal Acts of Corruption.

Law enforcement against the eradication of corruption that has been done conventionally has been proven to experience various obstacles. For this reason, extraordinary law enforcement methods are needed through criminal forms that provide a deterrent effect for perpetrators of corruption. If you look at the punishments given to several cases of corruption, it seems that this is not enough to provide a deterrent effect for perpetrators of corruption. This is proven by the increasing number of corruption cases in Indonesia today. In accordance with the theory of the purpose of punishment in which the punishment needs to be imposed because it is an absolute demand, the essence of the crime is retaliation (the theory of retaliation), the crime also functions as a deterrent so that people do not commit crimes to create order in society (relative theory), the crime is also to create a balance. between the elements of retaliation with the aim of correcting the perpetrators of the crime (combined theory).

So far, in the process of imposing criminal penalties for cases of public corruption, they feel unfair because many judges make decisions that cause disparities. To reduce this disparity, the Supreme Court is quite based and deserves to be appreciated in issuing the Perma which aims to be used as part or a means to bridge and reduce the disparity of judges’ decisions in cases of criminal acts of corruption. So, in essence, the presence of this Perma aims to guide punishment. The sentencing guidelines are an effort to reduce the disparity in sentencing cases of corruption. This is done so that when the judge determines that the defendant in a corruption case is sentenced to how many years, according to the weight and degree of guilt.

However, it should also be understood that the presence of the Perma is not an attempt to eliminate the freedom of judges because the Perma serves as a sentencing guideline. The weight and degree of punishment is regulated based on several influential criteria. So it can also be seen that in the Perma there are classifications (high, medium, low) which regarding the freedom of the judges needs to be regulated so that there is no bias in the Perma. In this case the freedom of judges is the crown of judges, so independence is the most important thing in the judiciary. Precisely with the existence of this regulation, judges will be facilitated in regulating the character in which a person must be punished based on his mistakes, not punished based on more than his mistakes. So that it is expected to reduce disparities in corruption cases. In this case, it is clearly stated in Article 2 paragraphs (1) and (2) of the Law, which discusses unlawful acts committed by corruptors and in Article 3, which in essence discusses abuse of authority.

Basically, according to the Perma, when the verdict is against the law and when to abuse this authority, it depends on the situation and the number of people who have been corrupted.
Of course, the Judge in imposing a criminal offense against Article 2 and Article 3 of the Corruption Eradication Law is based on several principles, namely:
1. Independence of Judges;
2. Professionalism;
3. Transparency;
4. Accountability;
5. Proportionality;
6. Justice;
7. Benefit; and
8. Legal certainty.

In this case, the sentencing guidelines are aimed at first, to facilitate judges in adjudicating criminal cases under Article 2 and Article 3 of the Law on the Eradication of Criminal Acts of Corruption. Second, to prevent differences in the range of criminal penalties for cases of criminal acts Article 2 and Article 3 of the Law on the Eradication of Corruption Crimes which have similar characteristics without sufficient consideration without reducing the authority and independence of judges.

Third, obliging judges to consider the reasons in determining the severity of the crime against Article 2 and Article 3 of the Law on the Eradication of Criminal Acts of Corruption; and. Fourth, realizing legal certainty, justice, and proportional benefit in imposing criminal cases against criminal acts of Article 2 and Article 3 of the Law on the Eradication of Criminal Acts of Corruption.

This is our country, our nation, our land, our home, and we must not allow corruption to oppress the people. The rulers of this country have become blind, blind to the suffering of the people. For that, wherever we are, let us join hands, unite to form a strong human fence, to fight corruption in this country. Don’t be afraid to stand at the forefront to fight any form of oppression in this country. It has been too long since the corruption virus has plagued our nation, therefore today we must eliminate it from our motherland. It should also be understood that the presence of this regulation is actually not to criminalize someone, but the presence of this regulation is to equalize us as Indonesians so that we as Indonesian citizens are more systematic so that the Indonesian people are better than other nations in terms of morality.



Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here