"This regulation will be a reference to central and local government agencies in preparing annual action plans"
President
Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono (SBY) finally issued Presidential Decree
(Presidential Decree) of the National Strategy for Corruption Prevention
and Combating 2012-2014 and 2012-2025 period. This regulation is a concrete step in preventing the SBY government and combat corruption in the country.
"This
regulation is very important in efforts to combat and prevent
corruption, to run in a systematic and contextual," said Vice President
Boediono told reporters when announcing the release of the Presidential
Regulation on the Vice President, Jakarta, Wednesday (30/5).
Attending
the press conference the Coordinating Minister for Political, Legal and
Security Joko Suyanto, Justice Minister Amir Syamsudin, Attorney
General Basrief Arief, National Police Chief Gen. Pradopo East,
President and Head of Unit for Supervision and Control of Development
(UKP4) Kuntoro.
According
to Boediono, the real anti-corruption program has been running since
the United Indonesia Cabinet (KiB) I in addition to the annual action
plan and the eradication of corruption, for example, through the
Presidential Instruction No.. 9 Year 2011 Action Plan on the Prevention and Eradication of Corruption in 2011 and Presidential Instruction No.. 17 Year 2011 on the Prevention and Combating of Corruption Action 2012.
Such
efforts, said Boediono, now united for the first time in the National
Strategy Prevention and Eradication of Corruption (National Strategy
sets-PPK) which was inaugurated in gazetted as a Presidential
Regulation. 55 Year 2012 dated May 23, 2012 on Long-Term National Strategy sets PPK (2012-2025) and the Medium Term (2012-2014).
Boediono
said the number of parties such as law enforcement agencies, Bappenas,
civil society (academics and activist NGOs) anti-corruption activists,
and experts have been involved in drafting this regulation.
According
to Boediono, this regulation not only provide direction for
anti-corruption policy in all government institutions, both national and
local, but also provide clarity for the size of the anti-corruption
efforts in Indonesia through a number of indicators of the achievements
targeted to increase every year. "Regulation is a real effort to continue the war against corruption," he said.
It
is said Boediono, the regulation reflects the commitment of the
Government of Indonesia to the "United Nations Convention Against
Corruption" (UN Convention on Corruption, UNCAC) 2003 which was ratified
through Law no. 7 of 2006. Boediono
hope Presidential National Strategy for the Prevention and Combating of
Corruption will be the main reference for ministries / agencies and
local governments in preparing annual action plans to eradicate
corruption in the respective institutions.
"All
government agencies must draw up action plans to combat corruption,"
said Chief Presidential Work Unit for Supervision and Control of
Development (UKP4) Kuntoro conference at the Vice President of Jakarta,
Wednesday (30/5).
According
to Kuntoro, the next National Strategy sets will be the reference KDP
central and local government agencies in preparing the annual action
plan or "Action PPK" at each institution. "Action
PPK which refers to the focus of activities within the National
Strategy sets a later PPK is poured into the presidential instruction on
every year," he said.
To
help formulate the action of PPK, Kuntoro said, has provided numerous
examples of anti-corruption devices that can be adopted by the
ministries and institutions. The
results of the implementation of the action per quarterly KDP reported
and monitored by the Ministry of National Development Planning /
Bappenas and other related intansi.
"There
was also coupled with the discipline of monitoring, the various
indicators of success that has been targeted is expected to be achieved
so that truly reflect the seriousness of the presence of an improvement
in the fight against corruption," said Kuntoro.
Successful
or unsuccessful implementation of the National Strategy sets PPK, he
says, is measured based on three key performance indicators, namely the
Corruption Perception Index in Indonesia, the match between Indonesia's
anti-corruption arrangements with the UN Convention on Corruption
(UNCAC), as well as the National Integrity System.
"Each
strategy is measured through performance indicators have been selected
to support the achievement of the National Strategy sets the vision and
mission of the KDP," he said. Performance
indicators that include the Prevention of Corruption Index, Index
Anti-Corruption Law Enforcement, Rescue Assets Ratio The Corruption and
Anticorruption Behavior Index.
Sources: www.hukumonline.com
Thursday, May 31, 2012
Persecution of Journalists, the Navy Person Must Be Prosecuted Firm
There are still many government agencies and community elements that are not familiar with the work of journalists. Two
days ago, six journalists were beaten several members of the Navy in
Padang, West Sumatra, while covering the demolition by municipal
regulation of the stall where the alleged immoral practices.
Worse, the persecution of journalists who are doing the job of journalism is sometimes accompanied by the seizure of journalists equipment. The persecution of six reporters in Padang for example, accompanied by the seizure of a camera carried by a person of the Navy.
Member of Parliament from the PKS faction, Indra condemned persecution and confiscation of equipment such journalists. Because, according to Indra, an act of journalistic activity protected by the laws, especially Law. 40 of 1999 on the Press.
"Anyone or any party must not obstruct journalists in carrying out the coverage. Moreover, the abuse, vandalism, and looting of equipment coverage, "he told hukumonline, Thursday (31/5).
According to Indra, the act of arrogance and abuse is allegedly an attempt to cover up pembekingan the dimly lit stalls are often used as nasty. Action a number of elements of the Navy is very unprofessional and should be investigated POM Navy.
Indra TNI chief urges action against subordinates who act arrogant and persecuting. He believes, the TNI commander would not allow the assumption that military action to protect or allow violations of his subordinates.
In addition, Indra also supports any constructive measures undertaken in order to build understanding of the professionalism of the TNI and TNI soldiers on press freedom, journalistic rights, and so forth. Is it in the form of MoU between the Press Council with the military or in other forms.
Clearly, Indra stressed, there should no longer attempt to violence and deprivation of the journalism. TNI must have understanding of journalistic work that is protected by law. Things like that never should have happened if the mentality and mindset of soldiers already restyled.
"The army is not a first-class citizens who can act arbitrarily and arrogant, but the army is the protector of the country, folk, and the homeland of Indonesia. Not the other way, "said Indra.
Likewise, the Indonesian Television Journalists Association (IJTI) Bali condemned violence by unscrupulous Lantamal II Marine Defense Padang. Chairman IJTI Bali Putu Setiawan said the incident was an act which threatens press freedom in Indonesia. According to him, the offender should receive strict punishment of its leaders in order not to be a bad precedent.
Arrogant person's actions caused the Marine Global TV cameraman Budi Sunandar suffered injury in the right ear and received seven stitches. Budi cameras in the action taken, and until now has not been returned. While the camera's local television station cameraman Favorite TV Jamaldi destroyed.
Later, Metro TV Afriyandi Contributors also have bruises on the face. A number of other journalists who also become victims of these SCTV cameraman, cameramen and photographers Trans7 Padang Express (JPNN group). Action is also unfortunate individual Marines West Sumatra Governor Irwan Prayitno.
Irwan expect a beating journalists who do individual Marines were investigated thoroughly and prosecuted. Dimly lit stalls demolition was carried out as mayor of Padang West Sumatra people are religious people who want no immoral place in the region.
Therefore, the alleged number of stalls where prostitution was dismantled for the sake of accommodating the aspirations of the people of Padang. Irwan said the Padang was anxious for the existence of the place. He hoped all parties to maintain an atmosphere conducive and orderly that was created in the realm of Minang.
Been detainedFor the actions of his subordinates, Commander Brigadier General Padang Lantamal II (Mar) Gatot Subroto said the existing affirmative action. Navy Military Police (POMAL) has arrested 12 soldiers from the unit elements of Defense Battalion Marines Navy Main Base II Padang who allegedly committed abuses against journalists.
In addition to suspected abuse, the individual soldiers of the Navy was also suspected of looting and destruction of equipment do the work of journalists covering the action on the demolition of illegal buildings Mount Lights, Baremas River Village, District Lubuk Begalung.
Of the 12 soldiers who were detained, including the initials ZM Sergeant, Sergeant SH, Koptu B, PFC A, PFC K, Pratu Z, Pratu DM, Pratu K, Pratu DEP, Pratu U.S., and Pratu E. Billy said he would not cover up, even cases that are reported to the Chief of Staff of the Navy.
Billy apologized and said they would conduct a thorough investigation. He was sure it would not protect soldiers convicted of abuse. Billy also claimed to have found two video cameras record previously owned by a journalist who allegedly robbed the Navy rogue soldiers.
Sources: www.hukumonline.com
Worse, the persecution of journalists who are doing the job of journalism is sometimes accompanied by the seizure of journalists equipment. The persecution of six reporters in Padang for example, accompanied by the seizure of a camera carried by a person of the Navy.
Member of Parliament from the PKS faction, Indra condemned persecution and confiscation of equipment such journalists. Because, according to Indra, an act of journalistic activity protected by the laws, especially Law. 40 of 1999 on the Press.
"Anyone or any party must not obstruct journalists in carrying out the coverage. Moreover, the abuse, vandalism, and looting of equipment coverage, "he told hukumonline, Thursday (31/5).
According to Indra, the act of arrogance and abuse is allegedly an attempt to cover up pembekingan the dimly lit stalls are often used as nasty. Action a number of elements of the Navy is very unprofessional and should be investigated POM Navy.
Indra TNI chief urges action against subordinates who act arrogant and persecuting. He believes, the TNI commander would not allow the assumption that military action to protect or allow violations of his subordinates.
In addition, Indra also supports any constructive measures undertaken in order to build understanding of the professionalism of the TNI and TNI soldiers on press freedom, journalistic rights, and so forth. Is it in the form of MoU between the Press Council with the military or in other forms.
Clearly, Indra stressed, there should no longer attempt to violence and deprivation of the journalism. TNI must have understanding of journalistic work that is protected by law. Things like that never should have happened if the mentality and mindset of soldiers already restyled.
"The army is not a first-class citizens who can act arbitrarily and arrogant, but the army is the protector of the country, folk, and the homeland of Indonesia. Not the other way, "said Indra.
Likewise, the Indonesian Television Journalists Association (IJTI) Bali condemned violence by unscrupulous Lantamal II Marine Defense Padang. Chairman IJTI Bali Putu Setiawan said the incident was an act which threatens press freedom in Indonesia. According to him, the offender should receive strict punishment of its leaders in order not to be a bad precedent.
Arrogant person's actions caused the Marine Global TV cameraman Budi Sunandar suffered injury in the right ear and received seven stitches. Budi cameras in the action taken, and until now has not been returned. While the camera's local television station cameraman Favorite TV Jamaldi destroyed.
Later, Metro TV Afriyandi Contributors also have bruises on the face. A number of other journalists who also become victims of these SCTV cameraman, cameramen and photographers Trans7 Padang Express (JPNN group). Action is also unfortunate individual Marines West Sumatra Governor Irwan Prayitno.
Irwan expect a beating journalists who do individual Marines were investigated thoroughly and prosecuted. Dimly lit stalls demolition was carried out as mayor of Padang West Sumatra people are religious people who want no immoral place in the region.
Therefore, the alleged number of stalls where prostitution was dismantled for the sake of accommodating the aspirations of the people of Padang. Irwan said the Padang was anxious for the existence of the place. He hoped all parties to maintain an atmosphere conducive and orderly that was created in the realm of Minang.
Been detainedFor the actions of his subordinates, Commander Brigadier General Padang Lantamal II (Mar) Gatot Subroto said the existing affirmative action. Navy Military Police (POMAL) has arrested 12 soldiers from the unit elements of Defense Battalion Marines Navy Main Base II Padang who allegedly committed abuses against journalists.
In addition to suspected abuse, the individual soldiers of the Navy was also suspected of looting and destruction of equipment do the work of journalists covering the action on the demolition of illegal buildings Mount Lights, Baremas River Village, District Lubuk Begalung.
Of the 12 soldiers who were detained, including the initials ZM Sergeant, Sergeant SH, Koptu B, PFC A, PFC K, Pratu Z, Pratu DM, Pratu K, Pratu DEP, Pratu U.S., and Pratu E. Billy said he would not cover up, even cases that are reported to the Chief of Staff of the Navy.
Billy apologized and said they would conduct a thorough investigation. He was sure it would not protect soldiers convicted of abuse. Billy also claimed to have found two video cameras record previously owned by a journalist who allegedly robbed the Navy rogue soldiers.
Sources: www.hukumonline.com
Strike threat 'Vice Lord'
"Do
not judge traded equity when faced with economic difficulties. Supreme
Court said he could not lobby, let alone the press, the government and
Parliament on the welfare of the judge concerned."
Like embers in the chaff, the issue of welfare of the judge could explode at any time. Although not necessarily a big fire burned, the heat issue has been warmed up in the courts. A number of judges openly threaten strike the trial, even called for a national strike if the government and parliament remain indifferent to the welfare of judges.
Act No. 48 of 2009 on Judicial Authority to give the judge as the official state position. This position brings the consequences of a judge obtained the rights and obligations as other state officials. But, the judge has the title "Venerable", which was owned by other state officials. The judges are responsible to God for every decision. That's why judges are often referred to as 'representative of God'. Now a number of 'representative of God' welfare demands were met.
Sunoto is one of the judges who are planning a strike. He claimed dozens of judges to support the plan. Aceh Tamiang District Court asked the government cares about the fate of the judge. Judges in the areas of income that the average Rp2, 8 million per month to rent out the house, transportation, and daily meals. Sunoto purpose may be good. Do not get because of low pay, short-minded judge who traded equity when faced with difficult situations.
Strike plan was not realized until this writing. But the idea was widespread not only by the general court judges as Sunoto. Adhoc judges of the Industrial Relations Court (PHI) had been discussed at a meeting in Jakarta last March 23 to 25. Sahala Arita, Chairman of the Board of Judges Adhoc Daily Forum PHI, and several other officials had met with Chairman of the Private Sector Young MA, Mohammad Saleh. Saleh, Sahala convey communication forum where judges, and presented a kind of 'petition' on the welfare of judges.
Sahala and the PHI requested adhoc judges ignored their welfare. In particular, the judges adhoc PHI is little difference in protest over their allowances than their colleagues at the Corruption Court. "There is a very far," said Sahala.
Subekti, Deputy Secretary of Forum Communications Daily, the judge judges who served in areas such as Papua and West Papua could even now do not go bankrupt if the allowance is increased. The cost of living and transport to the area is very expensive.
Imagine, judge salary class III / a 0-year period of employment with the Rp1.976.600, whereas the salary civil servants working class and the same time earn a basic salary of Rp2.064.100. The highest base salary of judges based on Government Regulation No. 10 of 2007 is Rp4.978.000.
"If these conditions persist while the government seemed to turn a blind eye and do not seem to care about the real conditions in the field, resulting in the ambiguity of status and fate of the judges, it is questionable, the judge called it appropriate state officials?", Writes Imdad, Pangkalan Kerinci religious court judges, Riau, in the Republika daily (29/3).
Stipulated by the LawThe courage of the judges expressed their thoughts on the threat and publicly demonstrate an urgent issue to be resolved. Welfare is a requirement that the judge has become a mandate of law.
Look at Article 25 of Law No. 49 of 2009. Wet on these public courts give judges the right to basic salary, benefits, office expenses, pension and other rights. Allowances referred to in the form of office allowances and other benefits under the legislation. While the other rights included home state office, healthcare, and state-owned transportation facilities. As state officials, also have a standing protocol.
Basic salaries of judges provided for in Regulation No 11 of 2008, while the allowance is set by Presidential Decree No. 89 of 2001. PP No. 11 Year 2008 is the fifth change of Regulation No. 8 Year 2000 on the Regulation of Wages Judge General Court, Administrative Court, and the Religious.
There is another Presidential Decree No 19 of 2008 concerning specific benefits the performance of judges. Court and Court of Religion class II obtain the lowest benefits, amounting to Rp 4, 2 million. While chairman of the court of appeal for all environments get Rp13 million. The highest, of course Chief Justice, at Rp31, 1 million. Special allowances of this performance has not been fully paid every month. Specifically for the performance benefits can be compared with the prosecutor. Based on Presidential Decree No. 41 of 2011, the lowest performance benefits at the AGO is Rp1.645.000, and the highest Rp25.739.000.
The following table illustrates the amount of base salary less the judge with the lowest class of the working period 0, 10, 20, and 32 years.
Judges Salary Based on Appendix PP. 11 of 2008
Period of Employment Goals. III / a Gol.III / d Goals. IV / a Goals. IV / e
0 Years 1.9766 million 2.1599 million 2.2247 million 2.5039 million
10 Years 2.4501 million 2.6773 million 2.7576 million 3.1037 million
20 Years 3.037 million 3.3186 million 3.4182 million 3.8472 million
32 Years 3.9297 million 4.2941 million 4.4229 million 4.978 million
In addition, justices of health insurance has been regulated in Presidential Decree No. 88 of 2010. The Supreme Court justices get comprehensive health care through health insurance mechanisms. Not all judges get health care. "We can no medical benefits. If the pain it cost us to use their own money, "said Subekti, adhoc judges PHI.
Response to MA and KYComplaint is not heard of the judges of the Supreme Court officials. Shortly after taking office so the Chief Justice, HM Hatta Ali directly promising to fight for the welfare of judges. Welfare of the judge felt was lacking. Since 2007, the remuneration allowances have not been paid one hundred percent. "We will consider how the welfare of judges in the future," said Hatta in Jakarta, Wednesday (8/2).
As a follow-up of the Supreme Court has sent a letter administratively. Secretary of the Supreme Court, Nurhadi, said the letter containing the proposed salary increase of judges has been filed since last year and a half. "We've been fighting," he said.
Until now proposed salary increase was not reciprocated. Nurhadi said the Supreme Court an unusual lobbying 'political' in order to increase the welfare of the judge quickly terealisisasi. "We are not used to lobby," said the former Head of Legal and Public Relations of the Supreme Court.
The Supreme Court seemed to hand over to the government salary increases. That attitude also impressed the judges of the ad hoc meeting with the Chairman of the Young MA PHI Private Sector. To judges ad hoc, Chairman of the Civil Sector MA Young suggested that the problem taken care of increase in salaries and benefits to the Secretariat of State (State Secretariat). "The Supreme Court said report to the State Secretariat," said Sahala.
Spokesman MA, Gayus Lumbuun, can understand the complaints and the struggle of the judges. Supreme Court Judges and the Association of Indonesia (Ikahi) fight for the match. The proof, MA has sent a letter proposal. Therefore, Gaius asked the judge not to strike. Cause of action would be detrimental to the seeker of justice.
Vice Chairman of the Judicial Commission (KY) Imam Anshori Saleh declared the same thing. Strike is not prohibited, but the judges do not deserve. "The position that noble judge. Not beautiful when tinged with the strike, "he said.
Sources: www.hukumonline.com
Like embers in the chaff, the issue of welfare of the judge could explode at any time. Although not necessarily a big fire burned, the heat issue has been warmed up in the courts. A number of judges openly threaten strike the trial, even called for a national strike if the government and parliament remain indifferent to the welfare of judges.
Act No. 48 of 2009 on Judicial Authority to give the judge as the official state position. This position brings the consequences of a judge obtained the rights and obligations as other state officials. But, the judge has the title "Venerable", which was owned by other state officials. The judges are responsible to God for every decision. That's why judges are often referred to as 'representative of God'. Now a number of 'representative of God' welfare demands were met.
Sunoto is one of the judges who are planning a strike. He claimed dozens of judges to support the plan. Aceh Tamiang District Court asked the government cares about the fate of the judge. Judges in the areas of income that the average Rp2, 8 million per month to rent out the house, transportation, and daily meals. Sunoto purpose may be good. Do not get because of low pay, short-minded judge who traded equity when faced with difficult situations.
Strike plan was not realized until this writing. But the idea was widespread not only by the general court judges as Sunoto. Adhoc judges of the Industrial Relations Court (PHI) had been discussed at a meeting in Jakarta last March 23 to 25. Sahala Arita, Chairman of the Board of Judges Adhoc Daily Forum PHI, and several other officials had met with Chairman of the Private Sector Young MA, Mohammad Saleh. Saleh, Sahala convey communication forum where judges, and presented a kind of 'petition' on the welfare of judges.
Sahala and the PHI requested adhoc judges ignored their welfare. In particular, the judges adhoc PHI is little difference in protest over their allowances than their colleagues at the Corruption Court. "There is a very far," said Sahala.
Subekti, Deputy Secretary of Forum Communications Daily, the judge judges who served in areas such as Papua and West Papua could even now do not go bankrupt if the allowance is increased. The cost of living and transport to the area is very expensive.
Imagine, judge salary class III / a 0-year period of employment with the Rp1.976.600, whereas the salary civil servants working class and the same time earn a basic salary of Rp2.064.100. The highest base salary of judges based on Government Regulation No. 10 of 2007 is Rp4.978.000.
"If these conditions persist while the government seemed to turn a blind eye and do not seem to care about the real conditions in the field, resulting in the ambiguity of status and fate of the judges, it is questionable, the judge called it appropriate state officials?", Writes Imdad, Pangkalan Kerinci religious court judges, Riau, in the Republika daily (29/3).
Stipulated by the LawThe courage of the judges expressed their thoughts on the threat and publicly demonstrate an urgent issue to be resolved. Welfare is a requirement that the judge has become a mandate of law.
Look at Article 25 of Law No. 49 of 2009. Wet on these public courts give judges the right to basic salary, benefits, office expenses, pension and other rights. Allowances referred to in the form of office allowances and other benefits under the legislation. While the other rights included home state office, healthcare, and state-owned transportation facilities. As state officials, also have a standing protocol.
Basic salaries of judges provided for in Regulation No 11 of 2008, while the allowance is set by Presidential Decree No. 89 of 2001. PP No. 11 Year 2008 is the fifth change of Regulation No. 8 Year 2000 on the Regulation of Wages Judge General Court, Administrative Court, and the Religious.
There is another Presidential Decree No 19 of 2008 concerning specific benefits the performance of judges. Court and Court of Religion class II obtain the lowest benefits, amounting to Rp 4, 2 million. While chairman of the court of appeal for all environments get Rp13 million. The highest, of course Chief Justice, at Rp31, 1 million. Special allowances of this performance has not been fully paid every month. Specifically for the performance benefits can be compared with the prosecutor. Based on Presidential Decree No. 41 of 2011, the lowest performance benefits at the AGO is Rp1.645.000, and the highest Rp25.739.000.
The following table illustrates the amount of base salary less the judge with the lowest class of the working period 0, 10, 20, and 32 years.
Judges Salary Based on Appendix PP. 11 of 2008
Period of Employment Goals. III / a Gol.III / d Goals. IV / a Goals. IV / e
0 Years 1.9766 million 2.1599 million 2.2247 million 2.5039 million
10 Years 2.4501 million 2.6773 million 2.7576 million 3.1037 million
20 Years 3.037 million 3.3186 million 3.4182 million 3.8472 million
32 Years 3.9297 million 4.2941 million 4.4229 million 4.978 million
In addition, justices of health insurance has been regulated in Presidential Decree No. 88 of 2010. The Supreme Court justices get comprehensive health care through health insurance mechanisms. Not all judges get health care. "We can no medical benefits. If the pain it cost us to use their own money, "said Subekti, adhoc judges PHI.
Response to MA and KYComplaint is not heard of the judges of the Supreme Court officials. Shortly after taking office so the Chief Justice, HM Hatta Ali directly promising to fight for the welfare of judges. Welfare of the judge felt was lacking. Since 2007, the remuneration allowances have not been paid one hundred percent. "We will consider how the welfare of judges in the future," said Hatta in Jakarta, Wednesday (8/2).
As a follow-up of the Supreme Court has sent a letter administratively. Secretary of the Supreme Court, Nurhadi, said the letter containing the proposed salary increase of judges has been filed since last year and a half. "We've been fighting," he said.
Until now proposed salary increase was not reciprocated. Nurhadi said the Supreme Court an unusual lobbying 'political' in order to increase the welfare of the judge quickly terealisisasi. "We are not used to lobby," said the former Head of Legal and Public Relations of the Supreme Court.
The Supreme Court seemed to hand over to the government salary increases. That attitude also impressed the judges of the ad hoc meeting with the Chairman of the Young MA PHI Private Sector. To judges ad hoc, Chairman of the Civil Sector MA Young suggested that the problem taken care of increase in salaries and benefits to the Secretariat of State (State Secretariat). "The Supreme Court said report to the State Secretariat," said Sahala.
Spokesman MA, Gayus Lumbuun, can understand the complaints and the struggle of the judges. Supreme Court Judges and the Association of Indonesia (Ikahi) fight for the match. The proof, MA has sent a letter proposal. Therefore, Gaius asked the judge not to strike. Cause of action would be detrimental to the seeker of justice.
Vice Chairman of the Judicial Commission (KY) Imam Anshori Saleh declared the same thing. Strike is not prohibited, but the judges do not deserve. "The position that noble judge. Not beautiful when tinged with the strike, "he said.
Sources: www.hukumonline.com
Tidal Advocate-Client Relationship
Trust is key in the client-lawyer relationship. Perfunctory defense could fuel resentment clients. Conversely, excessive defense against the client could fuel anger others. Moreover, if the lawyer issued a statement that offends a third party.
The most recent case happened Virza Hizzal Roy. Young Advocates of Law graduate of the University of Indonesia graduate was sentenced to honor the Honorary Board, the Regional Assembly (DKD) Jakarta Indonesian Advocates Association (PERADI). Violated Article 3 of the Code Advocate h Indonesia (KEAI), Virza dijatuh sanctions stern warning and pay legal costs 3.5 million rupiah.
Cases that make the case dragged Virza breach the code of conduct could not be separated from the client's defense. He defended free of charge two workers who were dismissed from PT Jurnalindo Graphic script. One of the road taken is trying to publicize the case Virza his client to the media, by sending a release. One of the submissions it received media is Bisnis Indonesia daily print media published PT Jurnalindo Literacy Graphic. In the release there is sentence 'oppressors and exploiters of workers'.
Jurnalindo that sentence protested. The Company requested that Virza interesting release. Efforts to reconcile these cases did not succeed. Through legal counsel, Jurnalindo Virza finally reported to the Honor Council PERADI decision to drop last April.
DKD Virza colleagues criticized Jakarta's decision. Because, Virza was fighting for the interests of his client. Moreover, the defense is done probono. "Remember, the goal is noble Virza the fight for labor rights," said Wesley Parulian Sibarani Eddy, Chief Justice Seeker Youth Organization.
Virza not the only lawyer who was convicted of certain actions when defending a client. Nyoman Suryadarma still remember the case right? Advocates from Bali was once sentenced to six months suspension DKD London in February 2010 two ago. The cause: the lawyer leading the witness to lie in the murder of journalist Bali. Nyoman Susrama, the defendant in this case, the client Nyoman Suryadarma. The act told witnesses to lie violates the Act and code of ethics advocates. Suryadarma is leading the witness denied.
Law No. 18 Year 2003 concerning Advocates determine advocates of legal services provided include legal advice, legal assistance, and other legal acts for clients' legal interests. Advocates are also required to maintain the confidentiality of its clients. Trusting relationship is the foundation lawyer-client relationship.
If trust is lostBut the lawyer-client relationship is not always harmonious. Sometimes trust is difficult to turn into a dispute resolved through regular communication.
The causes are many. The most common is due to the honorarium (fee) and the lawyer-client disagreement concerning certain legal steps that must be done. If advocates suggest certain steps, but the client does not agree, the confidence level can be thinned. If the trust continues to erode further, giving authority to drop out either because of client initiatives, as well as advocate retreat.
Case of withdrawal of Ferry Amahorseya as a team member attorney Wafid Muharram can be used as an example. Ferry back because not agree more with his client. "There is a discrepancy understanding and thinking about defense policy direction should I do with the defendant desired," Ferry said in Jakarta Corruption Court session October 12 last year, while announcing his resignation.
The defendant is none other than Wafid Muharram. Ferry to Nazaruddin presented as a witness in the trial. The client believes the opposite. Differences of opinion that finally stuck, and Ferry pick attorney withdrew from the team.
Because of honorariumThe lawyer-client relationship, honorarium to be something important. Honorarium is payable rights advocates as agreed by the client. Payment mechanisms and other requirements are also based on the agreement. "It's an agreement between the lawyer and his client," said Ari Yusuf Amir, the lawyer who wrote the book Strategic Business Services Advocate (2008).
If the fee is not paid as agreed, lawyers are usually filed suit against the client. Iwan Kurniawan, a lawyer in Riau Islands, had filed a petition against his client in court Tanjung Pinang, last October 2010. Iwan after five clients sued to unilaterally decide the legal power after a civil case is taken care of land is completed. In the previous agreement has been agreed upon John and his team of attorneys will share 40 percent of the total area of land that was won. But the two sides finally agreed to terms.
If the client still does not pay honoraria advocate, the advocate can be sent to the client's bankruptcy petition. Hukumonline note this step ever taken Adiprasetyo & Partners law office of PT Jakarta Monorail, in 2007. Both parties are finally reconciled.
Advocates steps to sue the client because the issue of honorarium may be justified, at least it can be seen from the decision of the Supreme Court No. K/Pdt/2011 640. Panel of justices H. Atja Sondjaja, Prof. HM Hakim Nyak Pha, and Prof. Rahmadi destiny, Gani Djemat favor of Billy Sindoro & Partners. Billy Sindoro never give power of attorney to advocates of the law office when Billy face the Corruption Court case in Jakarta.
In its discretion, appoint a power of attorney of the Supreme Court December 1, 2008 which contains the provisions 'of this power is given to the payment'. According to the Court, the defendant has not carried out so that the payment is called default. Billy was sentenced to pay a fee amounting to Rp500 million lawyers.
The key: AgreementLegal reasoning of the Supreme Court refers to the agreement made advocate-client relationship. Maqdir Advocate Ismail explains common early advocate and client relationship is merely a power of attorney. After that, a new discussion about the fee agreement. Honorarium bids often come from lawyers. "Legal fees are made such that the offer letter," said Maqdir. If the client agrees, the two sides will sign.
Treaty advocates and clients is essential to prevent potential noise in the future. Moreover, said Artaji, lecturer at the Faculty of Law University of Padjadjaran Bandung, the position of lawyers and clients are basically balanced. Weak in understanding client's legal position. But through the agreement, both parties to be balanced. Through the agreement, said Artaji, rights and obligations of the parties to be known. "So the client and lawyer is protected," he said.
The same opinion was delivered lawyer Ari Yusuf Amir. From the beginning, the advocate and client should discuss the rights and obligations of each, and then pour it into the agreement. Even if there are bargaining process in determining the fee, according to Ari, it was something unusual. Determination of the tariff determined many factors. Each lawyer or law firm has its own criteria.
In order not to create problems in the future, Ari advise a client advocate and pour the contents of the agreement in detail. Do not just focus portend honorarium, because there are other things that can cause lawyer-client relationship deteriorated. Problems can come from clients, it could be from an advocate. "The agreement not only puts the fee, but also obligations," suggested the lawyer who handles cases once Antasari Azhar is.
Sources: www.hukumonline.com
The most recent case happened Virza Hizzal Roy. Young Advocates of Law graduate of the University of Indonesia graduate was sentenced to honor the Honorary Board, the Regional Assembly (DKD) Jakarta Indonesian Advocates Association (PERADI). Violated Article 3 of the Code Advocate h Indonesia (KEAI), Virza dijatuh sanctions stern warning and pay legal costs 3.5 million rupiah.
Cases that make the case dragged Virza breach the code of conduct could not be separated from the client's defense. He defended free of charge two workers who were dismissed from PT Jurnalindo Graphic script. One of the road taken is trying to publicize the case Virza his client to the media, by sending a release. One of the submissions it received media is Bisnis Indonesia daily print media published PT Jurnalindo Literacy Graphic. In the release there is sentence 'oppressors and exploiters of workers'.
Jurnalindo that sentence protested. The Company requested that Virza interesting release. Efforts to reconcile these cases did not succeed. Through legal counsel, Jurnalindo Virza finally reported to the Honor Council PERADI decision to drop last April.
DKD Virza colleagues criticized Jakarta's decision. Because, Virza was fighting for the interests of his client. Moreover, the defense is done probono. "Remember, the goal is noble Virza the fight for labor rights," said Wesley Parulian Sibarani Eddy, Chief Justice Seeker Youth Organization.
Virza not the only lawyer who was convicted of certain actions when defending a client. Nyoman Suryadarma still remember the case right? Advocates from Bali was once sentenced to six months suspension DKD London in February 2010 two ago. The cause: the lawyer leading the witness to lie in the murder of journalist Bali. Nyoman Susrama, the defendant in this case, the client Nyoman Suryadarma. The act told witnesses to lie violates the Act and code of ethics advocates. Suryadarma is leading the witness denied.
Law No. 18 Year 2003 concerning Advocates determine advocates of legal services provided include legal advice, legal assistance, and other legal acts for clients' legal interests. Advocates are also required to maintain the confidentiality of its clients. Trusting relationship is the foundation lawyer-client relationship.
If trust is lostBut the lawyer-client relationship is not always harmonious. Sometimes trust is difficult to turn into a dispute resolved through regular communication.
The causes are many. The most common is due to the honorarium (fee) and the lawyer-client disagreement concerning certain legal steps that must be done. If advocates suggest certain steps, but the client does not agree, the confidence level can be thinned. If the trust continues to erode further, giving authority to drop out either because of client initiatives, as well as advocate retreat.
Case of withdrawal of Ferry Amahorseya as a team member attorney Wafid Muharram can be used as an example. Ferry back because not agree more with his client. "There is a discrepancy understanding and thinking about defense policy direction should I do with the defendant desired," Ferry said in Jakarta Corruption Court session October 12 last year, while announcing his resignation.
The defendant is none other than Wafid Muharram. Ferry to Nazaruddin presented as a witness in the trial. The client believes the opposite. Differences of opinion that finally stuck, and Ferry pick attorney withdrew from the team.
Because of honorariumThe lawyer-client relationship, honorarium to be something important. Honorarium is payable rights advocates as agreed by the client. Payment mechanisms and other requirements are also based on the agreement. "It's an agreement between the lawyer and his client," said Ari Yusuf Amir, the lawyer who wrote the book Strategic Business Services Advocate (2008).
If the fee is not paid as agreed, lawyers are usually filed suit against the client. Iwan Kurniawan, a lawyer in Riau Islands, had filed a petition against his client in court Tanjung Pinang, last October 2010. Iwan after five clients sued to unilaterally decide the legal power after a civil case is taken care of land is completed. In the previous agreement has been agreed upon John and his team of attorneys will share 40 percent of the total area of land that was won. But the two sides finally agreed to terms.
If the client still does not pay honoraria advocate, the advocate can be sent to the client's bankruptcy petition. Hukumonline note this step ever taken Adiprasetyo & Partners law office of PT Jakarta Monorail, in 2007. Both parties are finally reconciled.
Advocates steps to sue the client because the issue of honorarium may be justified, at least it can be seen from the decision of the Supreme Court No. K/Pdt/2011 640. Panel of justices H. Atja Sondjaja, Prof. HM Hakim Nyak Pha, and Prof. Rahmadi destiny, Gani Djemat favor of Billy Sindoro & Partners. Billy Sindoro never give power of attorney to advocates of the law office when Billy face the Corruption Court case in Jakarta.
In its discretion, appoint a power of attorney of the Supreme Court December 1, 2008 which contains the provisions 'of this power is given to the payment'. According to the Court, the defendant has not carried out so that the payment is called default. Billy was sentenced to pay a fee amounting to Rp500 million lawyers.
The key: AgreementLegal reasoning of the Supreme Court refers to the agreement made advocate-client relationship. Maqdir Advocate Ismail explains common early advocate and client relationship is merely a power of attorney. After that, a new discussion about the fee agreement. Honorarium bids often come from lawyers. "Legal fees are made such that the offer letter," said Maqdir. If the client agrees, the two sides will sign.
Treaty advocates and clients is essential to prevent potential noise in the future. Moreover, said Artaji, lecturer at the Faculty of Law University of Padjadjaran Bandung, the position of lawyers and clients are basically balanced. Weak in understanding client's legal position. But through the agreement, both parties to be balanced. Through the agreement, said Artaji, rights and obligations of the parties to be known. "So the client and lawyer is protected," he said.
The same opinion was delivered lawyer Ari Yusuf Amir. From the beginning, the advocate and client should discuss the rights and obligations of each, and then pour it into the agreement. Even if there are bargaining process in determining the fee, according to Ari, it was something unusual. Determination of the tariff determined many factors. Each lawyer or law firm has its own criteria.
In order not to create problems in the future, Ari advise a client advocate and pour the contents of the agreement in detail. Do not just focus portend honorarium, because there are other things that can cause lawyer-client relationship deteriorated. Problems can come from clients, it could be from an advocate. "The agreement not only puts the fee, but also obligations," suggested the lawyer who handles cases once Antasari Azhar is.
Sources: www.hukumonline.com
Corrupt Pembacok Attorney, Planning Murder Indicted
Prosecutor off trial participants pembacokan Sistoyo, DS, were held in Bandung District Court on Thursday (31/5). Prosecutors, Alven, using layered charges in the indictment on the DS.
DS charged with intending and plotting the murder of Sistoyo, who is also the status of the accused of bribery. Primary charge, DS charged under Article 340 in conjunction with Article 351 paragraph (1) of the Criminal Code. Then, the indictment subsidiary, Article 338 in conjunction with Article 53 paragraph (1) of the Criminal Code. Then, Article 354 paragraph (1) of the Criminal Code to charge over a subsidiary, as well as Article 353 of the Criminal Code and Article 351 paragraph (1) of the Criminal Code to charge much more subsidiary.
The public prosecutor also indicted for committing such DS punishable under Article 2 paragraph (1) Law No. 12 of 1951. "Because, to bring a sharp weapon to commit a crime," explained Alven.
It is said Alven, DS had planned to stab Sistoyo since two months earlier. DS intention is to provide a deterrent effect for criminals.
"At first, the defendant often saw and followed the trial and had no intention Sistoyo slashed with a machete from a house tucked in the waist in front of the abdomen, but still discouraged because of the tight guard against Sistoyo," said Alven.
New on Wednesday, February 29, 2012, DS carry out his intention at the door of the courtroom in District Court I Bandung. Precisely 9:50 pm when Sistoyo give a press statement to reporters after undergoing trials.
DS issued a machete tucked into his waistband and then stab Sistoyo on the forehead, crying, "Traitor!" As a result of stab DS, Sistoyo wounded in the forehead three inches wide and about five centimeters wide skull with a depth of less than 0.5 inches by post mortem doctor on March 15, 2012.
From the injury, the prosecutor said, Sistoyo sick for ten days from February 29, 2012 until March 10, 2012.
Even if charged with multiple counts, the DS is not accompanied by a lawyer to defend him. Support even came from the dozens of spectators who continue to make noise since the DS came to the Bandung District Court.
One visitor was even interrupted the proceedings. DS detention pending their request. Interruption occurs when the presiding judge declared Nur Aslam DS right to file an exception to charges of public prosecutors. "We want to ask about the surety that we asked for your DS," said the man from the Chinese Community's Anti-Corruption.
However, the assembly does not heed the question and said the spectators have no right to disrupt the proceedings. The man with dozens of other supporters of the DS actually burst into the courtroom and stood in front of the guardrail. They kept calling for the suspension of detention for the DS.
Court security officer immediately formed a posse before the barrier while trying to appease supporters of DS.
To the DS, Aslam Nur judge then said that detention can only be penanguhan petition filed in writing in advance to run the trial court the principle of transparency.
The panel of judges led by Nur Aslam and member Syahrul Suptanto Day Mahmud and then reminded DS that based on the defendant's Criminal Code which carries a prison sentence of more than five years must be accompanied by a power law.
However, the 54-year-old DS that insist on its own advanced before the trial.
"That's right brother, but the council was read his rights to legal counsel. Later if at any moment wanted to use a lawyer can say to the assembly," Nur said Aslam.
Sources: www.hukumonline.com
DS charged with intending and plotting the murder of Sistoyo, who is also the status of the accused of bribery. Primary charge, DS charged under Article 340 in conjunction with Article 351 paragraph (1) of the Criminal Code. Then, the indictment subsidiary, Article 338 in conjunction with Article 53 paragraph (1) of the Criminal Code. Then, Article 354 paragraph (1) of the Criminal Code to charge over a subsidiary, as well as Article 353 of the Criminal Code and Article 351 paragraph (1) of the Criminal Code to charge much more subsidiary.
The public prosecutor also indicted for committing such DS punishable under Article 2 paragraph (1) Law No. 12 of 1951. "Because, to bring a sharp weapon to commit a crime," explained Alven.
It is said Alven, DS had planned to stab Sistoyo since two months earlier. DS intention is to provide a deterrent effect for criminals.
"At first, the defendant often saw and followed the trial and had no intention Sistoyo slashed with a machete from a house tucked in the waist in front of the abdomen, but still discouraged because of the tight guard against Sistoyo," said Alven.
New on Wednesday, February 29, 2012, DS carry out his intention at the door of the courtroom in District Court I Bandung. Precisely 9:50 pm when Sistoyo give a press statement to reporters after undergoing trials.
DS issued a machete tucked into his waistband and then stab Sistoyo on the forehead, crying, "Traitor!" As a result of stab DS, Sistoyo wounded in the forehead three inches wide and about five centimeters wide skull with a depth of less than 0.5 inches by post mortem doctor on March 15, 2012.
From the injury, the prosecutor said, Sistoyo sick for ten days from February 29, 2012 until March 10, 2012.
Even if charged with multiple counts, the DS is not accompanied by a lawyer to defend him. Support even came from the dozens of spectators who continue to make noise since the DS came to the Bandung District Court.
One visitor was even interrupted the proceedings. DS detention pending their request. Interruption occurs when the presiding judge declared Nur Aslam DS right to file an exception to charges of public prosecutors. "We want to ask about the surety that we asked for your DS," said the man from the Chinese Community's Anti-Corruption.
However, the assembly does not heed the question and said the spectators have no right to disrupt the proceedings. The man with dozens of other supporters of the DS actually burst into the courtroom and stood in front of the guardrail. They kept calling for the suspension of detention for the DS.
Court security officer immediately formed a posse before the barrier while trying to appease supporters of DS.
To the DS, Aslam Nur judge then said that detention can only be penanguhan petition filed in writing in advance to run the trial court the principle of transparency.
The panel of judges led by Nur Aslam and member Syahrul Suptanto Day Mahmud and then reminded DS that based on the defendant's Criminal Code which carries a prison sentence of more than five years must be accompanied by a power law.
However, the 54-year-old DS that insist on its own advanced before the trial.
"That's right brother, but the council was read his rights to legal counsel. Later if at any moment wanted to use a lawyer can say to the assembly," Nur said Aslam.
Sources: www.hukumonline.com
Wednesday, May 30, 2012
MAKALAH PERTANGGUNG JAWABAN DAN PENJATUHAN HUKUMAN PADA PERKARA TINDAK PIDANA KORUPSI MENURUT UNDANG-UNDANG NOMOR 31 TAHUN 1999
BAB
I
PENDAHULUAN
A.
Latar
Belakang Masalah
Korupsi berasal dari
bahasa Latin: corruptio dari kata kerja corrumpere = busuk, rusak,
menggoyahkan, memutarbalik, menyogok) menurut Transparency International adalah
perilaku pejabat publik, baik politikus|politisi maupun pegawai negeri, yang
secara tidak wajar dan tidak legal memperkaya diri atau memperkaya mereka yang
dekat dengannya, dengan menyalahgunakan kekuasaan publik yang dipercayakan
kepada mereka.
Dari sudut pandang hukum, tindak
pidana korupsi secara garis besar mencakupunsur-unsur sebagai berikut:
• perbuatan melawan hukum;
• penyalahgunaan kewenangan, kesempatan, atau sarana;
• memperkaya diri sendiri, orang lain, atau korporasi;
• merugikan keuangan negara
atau perekonomian negara;
Selain itu terdapat beberapa
jenis tindak pidana korupsi yang lain, diantaranya:
• memberi atau menerima hadiah atau janji (penyuapan);
• memberi atau menerima hadiah atau janji (penyuapan);
• penggelapan
dalam jabatan;
• pemerasan
dalam jabatan;
• ikut serta
dalam pengadaan (bagi pegawai negeri/penyelenggara negara);
• menerima
gratifikasi (bagi pegawai negeri/penyelenggara negara).
Dalam arti yang luas, korupsi
atau korupsi politis adalah penyalahgunaan jabatan resmi untuk keuntungan
pribadi. Semua bentuk pemerintah|pemerintahan rentan korupsi dalam prakteknya.
Beratnya korupsi berbeda-beda, dari yang paling ringan dalam bentuk penggunaan
pengaruh dan dukungan untuk memberi dan menerima pertolongan, sampai dengan
korupsi berat yang diresmikan, dan sebagainya. Titik ujung korupsi adalah
kleptokrasi, yang arti harafiahnya pemerintahan oleh para pencuri, di mana
pura-pura bertindak jujur pun tidak ada sama sekali.
Korupsi yang muncul di bidang
politik dan birokrasi bisa berbentuk sepele atau berat, terorganisasi atau
tidak. Walau korupsi sering memudahkan kegiatan kriminal seperti penjualan
narkotika, pencucian uang, dan prostitusi, korupsi itu sendiri tidak terbatas
dalam hal-hal ini saja. Untuk mempelajari masalah ini dan membuat solusinya,
sangat penting untuk membedakan antara korupsi dan kriminalitas|kejahatan.
Perkembangan peradaban dunia semakin
sehari seakan-akan berlari menuju modernisasi. Perkembangan yang selalu membawa
perubahan dalam setiap sendi kehidupan tampak lebih nyata. Seiring dengan itu
pula bentuk-bentuk kejahatan juga senantiasa mengikuti perkembangan jaman dan
bertransformasi dalam bentuk-bentuk yang semakin canggih dan beranekaragam.
Kejahatan dalam bidang teknologi dan ilmu pengetahuan senantiasa turut
mengikutinya. Kejahatan masa kini memang tidak lagi selalu menggunakan cara-cara
lama yang telah terjadi selama bertahun-tahun seiring dengan perjalanan usia
bumi ini. Bisa kita lihat contohnya seperti, kejahatan dunia maya (cybercrime),
tindak pidana pencucian uang (money laundering), tindak pidana korupsi dan
tindak pidana lainnya.
Salah satu tindak pidana yang
menjadi musuh seluruh bangsa di dunia ini. Sesungguhnya fenomena korupsi sudah
ada di masyarakat sejak lama, tetapi baru menarik perhatian dunia sejak perang
dunia kedua berakhir. Di Indonesia sendiri fenomena korupsi ini sudah ada sejak
Indonesia belum merdeka.
Salah satu bukti yang menunjukkan
bahwa korupsi sudah ada dalam masyarakat Indonesia jaman penjajahan yaitu
dengan adanya tradisi memberikan upeti oleh beberapa golongan masyarakat kepada
penguasa setempat.
Kemudian setelah perang dunia kedua,
muncul era baru, gejolak korupsi ini meningkat di Negara yang sedang
berkembang, Negara yang baru memperoleh kemerdekaan. Masalah korupsi ini sangat
berbahaya karena dapat menghancurkan jaringan sosial, yang secara tidak langsung
memperlemah ketahanan nasional serta eksistensi suatu bangsa. Reimon Aron
seorang sosiolog berpendapat bahwa korupsi dapat mengundang gejolak revolusi,
alat yang ampuh untuk mengkreditkan suatu bangsa. Bukanlah tidak mungkin
penyaluran akan timbul apabila penguasa tidak secepatnya menyelesaikan masalah
korupsi. (B. Simanjuntak, S.H., 1981:310)
Di Indonesia sendiri praktik korupsi
sudah sedemikian parah dan akut. Telah banyak gambaran tentang praktik korupsi
yang terekspos ke permukaan.
Di negeri ini sendiri, korupsi sudah
seperti sebuah penyakit kanker ganas yang menjalar ke sel-sel organ publik,
menjangkit ke lembaga-lembaga tinggi Negara seperti legislatif, eksekutif dan
yudikatif hingga ke BUMN. Apalagi mengingat di akhir masa orde baru, korupsi hampir
kita temui dimana-mana. Mulai dari pejabat kecil hingga pejabat tinggi.
Walaupun demikian, peraturan
perundang-undangan yang khusus mengatur tentang tindak pidana korupsi sudah
ada. Di Indonesia sendiri, undang-undang tentang tindak pidana korupsi sudah 4
(empat) kali mengalami perubahan. Adapun peraturan perundang-undangan yang mengatur
tentang korupsi, yakni :
1.
Undang-undang nomor 24 Tahun
1960 tentang pemberantasan tindak pidana korupsi,
2. Undang-undang nomor 3 Tahun 1971 tentang pemberantasan tindak pidana korupsi,
3. Undang-undang nomor 31 Tahun 1999 tentang pemberantasan tindak pidana korupsi,
4. Undang-undang nomor 20 Tahun 2001 tentang perubahan atas Undang
2. Undang-undang nomor 3 Tahun 1971 tentang pemberantasan tindak pidana korupsi,
3. Undang-undang nomor 31 Tahun 1999 tentang pemberantasan tindak pidana korupsi,
4. Undang-undang nomor 20 Tahun 2001 tentang perubahan atas Undang
undang pemberantasan tindak
pidana korupsi.
B.
Rumusan
masalah
Adapun yang menjadi permasalahan
dalam penyusunan makalah ini adalah sebagai berikut:
1.
Bagaimana Pertanggung Jawaban Pidana Pada
Perkara Tindak Pidana Korupsi Dalam Undang-undang Nomor 31 tahun 1999
2.
Bagaimana Penjatuhan Pidana
Pada Perkara Tindak Pidana Pada Perkara Tindak Pidana Korupsi Berdasarkan
ketentuan undang-undang nomor 31 Tahun 1999
C.
Tujuan
Penulisan
1. Untuk
mengetahui pertanggung jawaban Pidana Perkara Tindak Pidana Korupsi Dalam
Undang-Undang Nomor 31 tahun 1999
2.
Untuk mengetahui Bagaimana Penjatuhan
Pidana Pada Perkara Tindak Pidana
Korupsi Berdasarkan ketentuan undang-undang nomor 31 Tahun 1999
D.
Kegunaan
Penulisan
1.
Memberikan pemahaman tentang pertanggung jawaban pidana pada perkara
tindak pidana korupsi menurut Undang-Undang Nomor 31 tahun 1999
2.
Memberikan jenis-jenis
Penjatuhan Pidana Pada Perkara Tindak Pidana Korupsi menurut Undang-undang
Nomor 31 tahun 1999
BAB
II
TINJAUAN PUSTAKA
A.
Pengertian
Korupsi
Dalam ensiklopedia Indonesia disebut
“korupsi” (dari bahasa Latin: corruption = penyuapan; corruptore = merusak)
gejala dimana para pejabat, badan-badan Negara menyalahgunakan wewenang dengan
terjadinya penyuapan, pemalsuan serta ketidakberesan lainnya. Adapun arti harfia
dari korupsi dapat berupa :
1.
Kejahatan kebusukan, dapat disuap, tidak bermoral, kebejatan, dan ketidakjujuran.
2. Perbuatan yang buruk seperti penggelapan uang, penerimaan sogok dan sebagainya.
3. 1. Korup (busuk; suka menerima uang suap, uang sogok; memakai kekuasaan untuk kepentingan sendiri dan sebagainya.
2. Perbuatan yang buruk seperti penggelapan uang, penerimaan sogok dan sebagainya.
3. 1. Korup (busuk; suka menerima uang suap, uang sogok; memakai kekuasaan untuk kepentingan sendiri dan sebagainya.
2.
Korupsi (perbuatan busuk seperti penggelapan uang, penerimaan uang sogok dan
sebagainya);
3.
Koruptor (orang yang korupsi).
Baharuddin Lopa mengutip pendapat
dari David M. Chalmers, menguraikan arti istilah korupsi dalam berbagai bidang,
yakni yang menyangkut masalah penyuapan, yang berhubungan dengan manipulasi di
bidang ekonomi, dan yang menyangkut bidang kepentingan umum. (Evi Hartanti,
S.H., 2005:9)
Berdasarkan undang-undang bahwa
korupsi diartikan:
1. Barang siapa dengan melawan hukum melakukan perbuatan memperkaya diri sendiri atau orang lain atau suatu badan yang secara langsung merugikan keuangan Negara dan atau perekonomian Negara dan atau perekonomian Negara atau diketahui patut disangka olehnya bahwa perbuatan tersebut merugikan keuangan Negara (Pasal 2);
1. Barang siapa dengan melawan hukum melakukan perbuatan memperkaya diri sendiri atau orang lain atau suatu badan yang secara langsung merugikan keuangan Negara dan atau perekonomian Negara dan atau perekonomian Negara atau diketahui patut disangka olehnya bahwa perbuatan tersebut merugikan keuangan Negara (Pasal 2);
2.
Barang siapa dengan tujuan menguntungkan diri sendiri atau orang lain atau
suatu badan menyalah gunakan kewenangan, kesempatan atau sarana yang ada
padanya karena jabatan atau kedudukan secara langsung dapat merugikan Negara
atau perekonomian Negara (Pasal 3).
3.
Barang siapa melakukan kejahatan yang tercantum dalam pasal 209, 210,
387,
388, 415, 416, 417, 418, 419, 420, 425, 435 KUHP.
B. Korupsi di
Indonesia
Korupsi di
Indonesia berkembang secara sistemik. Bagi banyak orang korupsi bukan lagi merupakan
suatu pelanggaran hukum, melainkan sekedar suatu kebiasaan. Dalam seluruh
penelitian perbandingan korupsi antar negara, Indonesia selalu menempati posisi
paling rendah. Perkembangan korupsi di Indonesia juga mendorong pemberantasan
korupsi di Indonesia. Namun hingga kini pemberantasan korupsi di Indonesia
belum menunjukkan titik terang melihat peringkat Indonesia dalam perbandingan
korupsi antar negara yang tetap rendah. Hal ini juga ditunjukkan dari banyaknya
kasus-kasus korupsi di Indonesia.
• Pemberantasan korupsi
di Indonesia
Pemberantasan
korupsi di Indonesia dapat dibagi dalam 3 periode, yaitu pada masa Orde Lama,
Orde Baru, dan Orde Reformasi.
1.
Orde Lama
Dasar Hukum:
KUHP (awal), UU 24 tahun 1960
Antara 1951 - 1956 isu korupsi mulai diangkat oleh koran lokal seperti Indonesia Raya yang dipandu Mochtar Lubis dan Rosihan Anwar. Pemberitaan dugaan korupsi Ruslan Abdulgani menyebabkan koran tersebut kemudian di bredel. Kasus 14 Agustus 1956 ini adalah peristiwa kegagalan pemberantasan korupsi yang pertama di Indonesia, dimana atas intervensi PM Ali Sastroamidjoyo, Ruslan Abdulgani, sang menteri luar negeri, gagal ditangkap oleh Polisi Militer. Sebelumnya Lie Hok Thay mengaku memberikan satu setengah juta rupiah kepada Ruslan Abdulgani, yang diperoleh dari ongkos cetak kartu suara pemilu. Dalam kasus tersebut mantan Menteri Penerangan kabinet Burhanuddin Harahap (kabinet sebelumnya), Syamsudin Sutan Makmur, dan Direktur Percetakan Negara, Pieter de Queljoe berhasil ditangkap.
Antara 1951 - 1956 isu korupsi mulai diangkat oleh koran lokal seperti Indonesia Raya yang dipandu Mochtar Lubis dan Rosihan Anwar. Pemberitaan dugaan korupsi Ruslan Abdulgani menyebabkan koran tersebut kemudian di bredel. Kasus 14 Agustus 1956 ini adalah peristiwa kegagalan pemberantasan korupsi yang pertama di Indonesia, dimana atas intervensi PM Ali Sastroamidjoyo, Ruslan Abdulgani, sang menteri luar negeri, gagal ditangkap oleh Polisi Militer. Sebelumnya Lie Hok Thay mengaku memberikan satu setengah juta rupiah kepada Ruslan Abdulgani, yang diperoleh dari ongkos cetak kartu suara pemilu. Dalam kasus tersebut mantan Menteri Penerangan kabinet Burhanuddin Harahap (kabinet sebelumnya), Syamsudin Sutan Makmur, dan Direktur Percetakan Negara, Pieter de Queljoe berhasil ditangkap.
Mochtar Lubis
dan Rosihan Anwar justru kemudian dipenjara tahun 1961 karena dianggap sebagai
lawan politik Sukarno. Nasionalisasi perusahaan-perusahaan Belanda dan asing di
Indonesia tahun 1958 dipandang sebagai titik awal berkembangnya korupsi di
Indonesia. Upaya Jenderal AH Nasution mencegah kekacauan dengan menempatkan
perusahaan-perusahaan hasil nasionalisasi di bawah Penguasa Darurat Militer
justru melahirkan korupsi di tubuh TNI.
Jenderal
Nasution sempat memimpin tim pemberantasan korupsi pada masa ini, namun kurang
berhasil.
Pertamina
adalah suatu organisasi yang merupakan lahan korupsi paling subur.
Kolonel
Soeharto, panglima Diponegoro saat itu, yang diduga terlibat dalam kasus
korupsi gula, diperiksa oleh Mayjen Suprapto, S Parman, MT Haryono, dan Sutoyo
dari Markas Besar Angkatan Darat. Sebagai hasilnya, jabatan panglima Diponegoro
diganti oleh Letkol Pranoto, Kepala Staffnya. Proses hukum Suharto saat itu
dihentikan oleh Mayjen Gatot Subroto, yang kemudian mengirim Suharto ke Seskoad
di Bandung. Kasus ini membuat DI Panjaitan menolak pencalonan Suharto menjadi
ketua Senat Seskoad.
2. Orde Baru
2. Orde Baru
Dasar Hukum: UU
3 tahun 1971
Korupsi orde baru dimulai dari penguasaan tentara atas bisnis-bisnis
strategis.
3. Reformasi
3. Reformasi
Dasar Hukum: UU
31 tahun 1999, UU 20 tahun 2001
Pemberantasan korupsi di Indonesia saat ini dilakukan oleh beberapa institusi:
Pemberantasan korupsi di Indonesia saat ini dilakukan oleh beberapa institusi:
1. Tim Tastipikor (Tindak Pidana Korupsi)
2. KPK (Komisi Pemberantasan Korupsi)
3. Kepolisian
4. Kejaksaan
5. BPKP
6. Lembaga non-pemerintah: Media massa Organisasi massa (mis: ICW)
C. Komisi
Pemberantasan Korupsi
Komisi
Pemberantasan Korupsi, atau disingkat menjadi KPK, adalah komisi di Indonesia
yang dibentuk pada tahun 2003 untuk mengatasi, menanggulangi dan memberantas
korupsi di Indonesia. Komisi ini didirikan berdasarkan kepada Undang-Undang
Republik Indonesia Nomor 30 Tahun 2002 mengenai Komisi Pemberantasan Tindak
Pidana Korupsi. Ketua KPK adalah Antasari Azhar (Non Aktif),Saat ini KPK
dipimpin secara kolektif.
Era Kepemimpinan KPK :
Era Kepemimpinan KPK :
1.
KPK di bawah
Taufiequrachman Ruki (2003-2007)
Pada tanggal 16 Desember 2003, Taufiequrachman Ruki, seorang alumni Akademi Kepolisian (Akpol) 1971, dilantik menjadi Ketua KPK. Di bawah kepemimpinan Taufiequrachman Ruki, KPK hendak memposisikan dirinya sebagai katalisator (pemicu) bagi aparat dan institusi lain untuk terciptanya jalannya sebuah "good and clean governance" (pemerintahan baik dan bersih) di Republik Indonesia. Sebagai seorang mantan Anggota DPR RI dari tahun 1992 sampai 2001, Taufiequrachman walaupun konsisten mendapat kritik dari berbagai pihak tentang dugaan tebang pilih pemberantasan korupsi.
Menurut Taufiequrachman Ruki, pemberantasan korupsi tidak hanya mengenai bagaimana menangkap dan memidanakan pelaku tindak pidana korupsi, tapi juga bagaimana mencegah tindak pidana korupsi agar tidak terulang pada masa yang akan datang melalui pendidikan antikorupsi, kampanye antikorupsi dan adanya contoh "island of integrity" (daerah contoh yang bebas korupsi).
Pernyataan Taufiequrachman mengacu pada definisi korupsi yang dinyatakan dalam UU No. 31 Tahun 1999 jo UU No. 20 Tahun 2001. Menurutnya, tindakan preventif (pencegahan) dan represif (pengekangan) ini dilakukan dengan "memposisikan KPK sebagai katalisator (trigger) bagi aparat atau institusi lain agar tercipta good and clean governance dengan pilar utama transparansi, partisipasi dan akuntabilitas".
Pada tanggal 16 Desember 2003, Taufiequrachman Ruki, seorang alumni Akademi Kepolisian (Akpol) 1971, dilantik menjadi Ketua KPK. Di bawah kepemimpinan Taufiequrachman Ruki, KPK hendak memposisikan dirinya sebagai katalisator (pemicu) bagi aparat dan institusi lain untuk terciptanya jalannya sebuah "good and clean governance" (pemerintahan baik dan bersih) di Republik Indonesia. Sebagai seorang mantan Anggota DPR RI dari tahun 1992 sampai 2001, Taufiequrachman walaupun konsisten mendapat kritik dari berbagai pihak tentang dugaan tebang pilih pemberantasan korupsi.
Menurut Taufiequrachman Ruki, pemberantasan korupsi tidak hanya mengenai bagaimana menangkap dan memidanakan pelaku tindak pidana korupsi, tapi juga bagaimana mencegah tindak pidana korupsi agar tidak terulang pada masa yang akan datang melalui pendidikan antikorupsi, kampanye antikorupsi dan adanya contoh "island of integrity" (daerah contoh yang bebas korupsi).
Pernyataan Taufiequrachman mengacu pada definisi korupsi yang dinyatakan dalam UU No. 31 Tahun 1999 jo UU No. 20 Tahun 2001. Menurutnya, tindakan preventif (pencegahan) dan represif (pengekangan) ini dilakukan dengan "memposisikan KPK sebagai katalisator (trigger) bagi aparat atau institusi lain agar tercipta good and clean governance dengan pilar utama transparansi, partisipasi dan akuntabilitas".
Taufiequrachman mengemukakan data hasil survei Transparency
Internasional mengenai penilaian masyarakat bisnis dunia terhadap pelayanan
publik di Indonesia. Hasil survei itu memberikan nilai IPK (Indeks Persepsi
Korupsi) sebesar 2,2 kepada Indonesia. Nilai tersebut menempatkan Indonesia
pada urutan 137 dari 159 negara tersurvei. Survei Transparency International
Indonesia berkesimpulan bahwa lembaga yang harus dibersihkan menurut responden,
adalah: lembaga peradilan (27%), perpajakan (17%), kepolisian (11%), DPRD
(10%), kementerian/departemen (9%), bea dan cukai (7%), BUMN (5%), lembaga
pendidikan (4%), perijinan (3%), dan pekerjaan umum (2%).
Lebih lanjut disampaikan, survei terbaru Transparency International yaitu "Barometer Korupsi Global", menempatkan partai politik di Indonesia sebagai institusi terkorup dengan nilai 4,2 (dengan rentang penilaian 1-5, 5 untuk yang terkorup). Masih berangkat dari data tersebut, di Asia, Indonesia menduduki prestasi sebagai negara terkorup dengan skor 9.25 (terkorup 10) di atas India (8,9), Vietnam (8,67), Filipina (8,33) dan Thailand (7,33).
Lebih lanjut disampaikan, survei terbaru Transparency International yaitu "Barometer Korupsi Global", menempatkan partai politik di Indonesia sebagai institusi terkorup dengan nilai 4,2 (dengan rentang penilaian 1-5, 5 untuk yang terkorup). Masih berangkat dari data tersebut, di Asia, Indonesia menduduki prestasi sebagai negara terkorup dengan skor 9.25 (terkorup 10) di atas India (8,9), Vietnam (8,67), Filipina (8,33) dan Thailand (7,33).
Dengan adanya data tersebut, terukur bahwa keberadaan korupsi di
Indonesia telah membudaya baik secara sistemik dan endemik. Maka
Taufiequrachman berasumsi bahwa kunci utama dalam pemberantasan korupsi adalah
integritas yang akan mencegah manusia dari perbuatan tercela, entah itu
"corruption by needs" (korupsi karena kebutuhan), "corruption by
greeds" (korupsi karena keserakahan) atau "corruption by
opportunities" (korupsi karena kesempatan). Taufiequrachman juga
menyampaikan bahwa pembudayaan etika dan integritas antikorupsi harus melalui
proses yang tidak mudah, sehingga dibutuhkan adanya peran pemimpin sebagai
teladan dengan melibatkan institusi keluarga, pemerintah, organisasi masyarakat
dan organisasi bisnis. Pada tahun 2007 Taufiequrachman Ruki digantikan oleh Antasari
Azhar sebagai Ketua KPK.
2.
KPK di bawah
Antasari Azhar (2007-2009)
Dimasa kepemimpinan Antasari Azhar telah banyak kasus-kasus
besar korupsi terungkap terbukti banyak para pejabat pemerintah yang
dipenjarakan karena kasus korupsi, hal ini terjadi karena kerjasama yang erat
antara lembaga penegak hukum yang ada di Indonesia. Namun perjalanan panjang pemberantasan
korupsi kepemimpinan Antasari Azhar terhambat akibat sejumlah sekenario
pelemahan KPK yang membuat Antasari Azhar di non aktifkan dari jabatannya.
3.
Tumpak Hatorangan
Panggabean (Plt Ketua)
Mantan Pimpinan KPK Jilid I periode 2003-2007 ini Lahir di
Sanggau, Kalimantan Barat, pada 29 Juli 1943, dan menamatkan pendidikan di
bidang hukum pada Universitas Tanjungpura Pontianak. Seusai menamatkan bangku
kuliah, bapak tiga anak ini memilih langsung untuk mengabdi kepada negara
dengan berkarier di Kejaksaan Agung pada1973. Karier di kejaksaan meliputi
Kajari Pangkalan Bun (1991-1993), Asintel Kejati Sulteng (1993-1994), Kajari
Dili (1994-1995), Kasubdit Pengamanan Ideologi dan Politik Pada JAM Intelijen
(1996-1997), Asintel Kejati DKI Jakarta (1997-1998), Wakajati Maluku
(1998-1999), Kajati Maluku (1999-2000), Kajati Sulawesi Selatan (2000-2001),
dan SESJAMPIDSUS (2001–2003).
Sosok pekerja keras ini pernah mendapatkan penghargaan Satya
Lencana Karua Satya XX Tahun 1997 dan Satya Lencana Karya Satya XXX 2003,
kemudian diusulkan oleh Jaksa Agung RI untuk bertugas di Komisi Pemberantasan
Korupsi pada tahun 2003.
Setelah memimpin KPK periode pertama, pada 2008 Tumpak diangkat
sebagai Anggota Dewan Komisaris PT Pos Indonesia (Pesero) berdasarkan Keputusan
Meneg BUMN, sebelumnya akhirnya dipilih oleh presiden untuk menduduki posisi
pejabat sementara (Plt) pimpinan KPK bersama Waluyo dan Mas Achmad Santosa.
BAB
III
PEMBAHASAN
A.
Pertanggung Jawaban Pidana Pada Perkara Tindak Pidana Korupsi Dalam Undang-undang
Nomor 31 tahun 1999
Dalam Undang-undang Nomor 31 tahun
1999 tentang pemberantasan tindak pidana korupsi Jo Undang-undang Nomor 20
Tahun 2001 tentang pemberantasan tindak pidana korupsi, pertanggung jawaban
pidana pada perkara tindak pidana korupsi yaitu:
1.
Korporasi adalah kumpulan orang dan atau kekayaan yang terorganisasi baik
merupakan badan hukum maupun bukan badan hukum.
2.
Pegawai Negeri adalah meliputi :
a.
Pegawai negeri sebagaimana dimaksud dalam Undang-undang tentang Kepegawaian;
b. Pegawai negeri sebagaimana dimaksud dalam Kitab Undang-undang Hukum Pidana;
c. Orang yang menerima gaji atau upah dari keuangan negara atau daerah;
d. Orang yang menerima gaji atau upah dari suatu korporasi yang menerima bantuan dari keuangan negara atau daerah; atau
e. Orang yang menerima gaji atau upah dari korporasi lain yang mempergunakan modal atau fasilitas dari negara atau masyarakat.
3. Setiap orang adalah orang perseorangan atau termasuk korporasi.
b. Pegawai negeri sebagaimana dimaksud dalam Kitab Undang-undang Hukum Pidana;
c. Orang yang menerima gaji atau upah dari keuangan negara atau daerah;
d. Orang yang menerima gaji atau upah dari suatu korporasi yang menerima bantuan dari keuangan negara atau daerah; atau
e. Orang yang menerima gaji atau upah dari korporasi lain yang mempergunakan modal atau fasilitas dari negara atau masyarakat.
3. Setiap orang adalah orang perseorangan atau termasuk korporasi.
B.
Penjatuhan Pidana Pada Perkara Tindak Pidana Korupsi Berdasarkan ketentuan
undang-undang nomor 31 Tahun 1999
Berdasarkan ketentuan undang-undang
nomor 31 Tahun 1999 jo undang-undang nomor 20 tahun 2001, jenis penjatuhan
pidana yang dapat dilakukan hakim terhadap terdakwa tindak pidana korupsi adalah
sebagai berikut.
Terhadap Orang yang melakukan Tindak Pidana Korupsi
1) Pidana Mati
Terhadap Orang yang melakukan Tindak Pidana Korupsi
1) Pidana Mati
Dapat dipidana mati karena kepada
setiap orang yang secara melawan hukum melakukan perbuatan memperkaya diri
sendiri atau orang lain atau suatu korporasi yang dapat merugikan keuangan
Negara atau perekonomian Negara sebagaimana ditentukan dalam Pasal 2 ayat (1)
Undang-undang nomor 31 tahun 1999 jo Undang-undang nomor 20 tahun 2001 tentang
pemberantasan tindak pidana korupsi, yang dilakukan dalam keadaan tertentu.
2) Pidana Penjara
1.
Pidana penjara seumur hidup atau pidana penjara paling singkat 4 (empat) tahun
dan paling lama 20 (dua puluh) tahun dan denda paling sedikit Rp.
200.000.000,00 (dua ratus juta rupiah) dan paling banyak Rp. 1.000.000.000,00
(satu miliar rupiah) bagi setiap orang yang secara melawan hukum melakukan
perbuatan memperkaya diri sendiri atau orang lain atau suatu korporasi yang
dapat merugikan keuangan Negara atau perkonomian Negara. (Pasal 2 ayat 1)
2. Pidana penjara seumur hidup atau pidana penjara paling singkat 1 (satu) tahun dan/atau denda paling sedikit Rp. 50.000.000,00 (lima puluh juta rupiah) dan paling banyak satu Rp. 1.000.000.000,00 (satu miliar rupiah) bagi setiap orang yang dengan tujuan menguntungkan diri sendiri atau orang lain atau suatu korporasi, menyalahgunakan kewenangan, kesempatan, atau sarana yang ada padanya karena jabatan atau kedudukan yang dapat merugikan keuangan Negara atau perekonomian Negara (Pasal 3)
2. Pidana penjara seumur hidup atau pidana penjara paling singkat 1 (satu) tahun dan/atau denda paling sedikit Rp. 50.000.000,00 (lima puluh juta rupiah) dan paling banyak satu Rp. 1.000.000.000,00 (satu miliar rupiah) bagi setiap orang yang dengan tujuan menguntungkan diri sendiri atau orang lain atau suatu korporasi, menyalahgunakan kewenangan, kesempatan, atau sarana yang ada padanya karena jabatan atau kedudukan yang dapat merugikan keuangan Negara atau perekonomian Negara (Pasal 3)
3.
Pidana penjara paling singkat 3 (tiga) tahun dan paling lama 12 (dua belas)
tahun dan/atau denda paling sedikit Rp.150.000.000,00 (seratus lima puluh juta
rupiah) dan paling banyak Rp. 600.000.000,00 (enam ratus juta) bagi setiap
orang yang dengan sengaja mencegah, merintangi atau menggagalkan secara
langsung atau tidak langsung penyidikan, penuntutan, dan pemeriksaan di siding
pengadilan terhadap tersangka atau terdakwa ataupun para saksi dalam perkara
korupsi. (Pasal 21)
4.
Pidana penjara paling singkat 3 (tiga) tahun dan paling lama 12 (dua belas)
tahun dan/atau denda paling sedikit Rp. 150.000.000,00 (seratus lima puluh juta
rupiah) dan paling banyak Rp. 600.000.000,00 (enam ratus juta rupiah) bagi
setiap orang sebagaimana dimaksud dalam pasal 28, pasal 29, pasal 35, dan pasal
36.
3) Pidana Tambahan
1.
Perampasan barang bergerak yang berwujud atau yang tidak berwujud atau barang
tidak bergerak yang digunakan untuk atau yang diperoleh dari tindak pidana
korupsi, termasuk perusahaan milik terpidana dimana tindak pidana korupsi
dilakukan, begitu pula dari barang yang menggantikan barang-barang tersebut.
2. Pembayaran uang pengganti yang jumlahnya sebanyak-banyaknya sama dengan harta yang diperoleh dari tindak pidana korupsi.
3. Penutupan seluruh atau sebagian perusahaan untuk waktu paling lama 1 (satu) tahun.
4. Pencabutan seluruh atau sebagian hak-hak tertentu atau penghapusan seluruh atau sebagian keuntungan tertentu yang telah atau dapat diberikan oleh pemerintah kepada terpidana.
5. Jika terpidana tidak membayar uang pengganti paling lama dalam waktu 1 (satu) bulan sesudah putusan pengadilan yang telah memperoleh kekuatan hukum tetap maka harta bendanya dapat disita oleh jaksa dan dilelang untuk menutupi uang pengganti tersebut.
6. Dalam hal terpidana tidak mempunyai harta benda yang mencukupi untuk membayar uang pengganti maka terpidana dengan pidana penjara yang lamanya tidak memenuhi ancaman maksimum dari pidana pokoknya sesuai ketentuan undang-undang nomor 31 tahun 1999 jo undang-undang nomor 20 tahun 2001 tentang pemberantasan tindak pidana korupsi dan lamanya pidana tersebut sudah ditentukan dalam putusan pengadilan.
4) Terhadap Tindak Pidana yang dilakukan Oleh atau Atas Nama Suatu Korporasi
2. Pembayaran uang pengganti yang jumlahnya sebanyak-banyaknya sama dengan harta yang diperoleh dari tindak pidana korupsi.
3. Penutupan seluruh atau sebagian perusahaan untuk waktu paling lama 1 (satu) tahun.
4. Pencabutan seluruh atau sebagian hak-hak tertentu atau penghapusan seluruh atau sebagian keuntungan tertentu yang telah atau dapat diberikan oleh pemerintah kepada terpidana.
5. Jika terpidana tidak membayar uang pengganti paling lama dalam waktu 1 (satu) bulan sesudah putusan pengadilan yang telah memperoleh kekuatan hukum tetap maka harta bendanya dapat disita oleh jaksa dan dilelang untuk menutupi uang pengganti tersebut.
6. Dalam hal terpidana tidak mempunyai harta benda yang mencukupi untuk membayar uang pengganti maka terpidana dengan pidana penjara yang lamanya tidak memenuhi ancaman maksimum dari pidana pokoknya sesuai ketentuan undang-undang nomor 31 tahun 1999 jo undang-undang nomor 20 tahun 2001 tentang pemberantasan tindak pidana korupsi dan lamanya pidana tersebut sudah ditentukan dalam putusan pengadilan.
4) Terhadap Tindak Pidana yang dilakukan Oleh atau Atas Nama Suatu Korporasi
Pidana pokok yang dapat
dijatuhkan adalah pidana denda dengan ketentuan maksimal ditambah 1/3
(sepertiga). Penjatuhan pidana ini melalui procedural ketentuan pasal 20 ayat
(1)-(5) undang-undang 31 tahun 1999 tentang pemberantasan tindak pidana korupsi
adalah sebagai berikut:
1. Dalam hal tindak pidana korupsi dilakukan oleh atau atas nama suatu korporasi, maka tuntutan dan penjatuhan pidana dapat dilakukan terhadap korporasi dan/atau pengurusnya.
1. Dalam hal tindak pidana korupsi dilakukan oleh atau atas nama suatu korporasi, maka tuntutan dan penjatuhan pidana dapat dilakukan terhadap korporasi dan/atau pengurusnya.
2.
Tindak pidana korupsi dilakukan oleh korporasi apabila tindak pidana tersebut
dilakukan oleh orang baik berdasarkan hubungan kerja maupun berdasarkan
hubungan lain, bertindak dalam lingkungan korporasi tersebut baik sendiri
maupun bersama-sama.
3.
Dalam hal ini tuntutan pidana dilakukan terhadap suatu korporasi maka korporasi
tersebut diwakili oleh pengurus, kemudian pengurus tersebut dapat diwakilkan
kepada orang lain.
4.
Hakim dapat memerintahkan supaya pengurus korporasi menghadap sendiri di
pengadilan dan dapat pula memerintahkan supaya penguruh tersebut dibawa ke
siding pengadilan.
5.
Dalam hal tuntutan pidana dilakukan terhadap korporasi, maka panggilan untuk
menghadap dan menyerahkan surat panggilan tersebut disampaikan kepada pengurus
di tempat tinggal pengurus atau ditempat pengurus berkantor.
Unsur-unsur tindak pidana korupsi
sebagaimana dimaksud dalam Undang-undang nomor 20 tahun 2001 tentang pemberantasan
tindak pidana korupsi adalah
1.
Melakukan perbuatan memperkaya diri sendiri atau orang lain atau suatu
korporasi;
2.
Perbuatan melawan hukum;
3.
Merugikan keuangan Negara atau perekonomian;
4.
Menyalahgunakan kekuasaan, kesempatan atas sarana yang ada padanya karena
jabatan dan kedudukannya dengan tujuan menguntungkan diri sendiri
atau
orang lain.
BAB
IV
PENUTUP
A.
KESIMPULAN
Dari uraian pengertian dan penyebab
korupsi di atas, dapat disimpulkan bahwa akibat dari tindak pidana korupsi
sangat luas dan mengakar. Adapun akibat dari korupsi adalah sebagai berikut:
1.
Berkurangnya kepercayaan terhadap pemerintah;
2.
Berkurannya kewibawaan pemerintah dalam masyarakat;
3.
Menyusutnya pendapatan Negara;
4.
Rapuhnya keamanan dan ketahanan Negara;
5. Perusakan mental
pribadi;
6. Hukum tidak lagi
dihormati.
B.
SARAN
Adapun
yang menjadi saran penulis dalam penyusunan makalah ini yakni korupsi adalah
masalah besar di negeri ini yang harus di perangi bersama-sama guna mencapai
kehidupan yang jujur dan bersih. Karena dengan prilaku jujur dari masyarakat
ataupun pemerintah akan membawa negeri ini jauh lebih baik.
DAFTAR
PUSTAKA
Hartanti, Evi, S.H.,
2005. Tindak Pidana Korupsi. Sinar Grafika : Jakarta
Marpaung, Leden,
S.H., 1992. Tindak Pidana Korupsi : Masalah dan
Pemecahannya Bagian kedua.
Sinar Grafika : Jakarta
Simanjuntak, B, S.H.,
1981. Pengantar Kriminologi dan Pantologi Sosial. Tarsino : Bandung
Kitab Undang-undang
Hukum Pidana
DAFTAR ISI
BAB
I PENDAHULUAN
A. Latar
Belakang Masalah....................................................................... 1
B. Rumusan
Masalah................................................................................ 4
C. Tujuan
penulisan................................................................................... 5
D. Kegunaan
penulisan............................................................................ 5
BAB
II TINJAUAN PUSTAKA
A. Pengertian
Korupsi................................................................................ 6
B. Korupsi di Indonesia............................................................................. 7
C. Komisi Pemberantasan Korupsi.......................................................... 10
BAB
III PEMBAHASAN
A. Pertanggung
Jawaban Pidana Pada Perkara ................................. 14
Tindak
Pidana Korupsi Dalam Undang-undang Nomor 31 tahun 1999
B. Penjatuhan
Pidana Pada Perkara Tindak Pidana .......................... 15
Pada
Perkara Tindak Pidana Korupsi Berdasarkan
ketentuan
undang-undang nomor 31 Tahun 1999
BAB
IV PENUTUP
A. KESIMPULAN........................................................................................ 20
B. SARAN.................................................................................................... 20
DAFTAR
PUSTAKA............................................................................................... 21
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)