Kepastian Hukum Penerapan Kriteria Kewenangan Penyidikan Perkara Tindak Pidana Korupsi oleh Komisi Pemberantasan Korupsi Republik Indonesia

Authors

  • Lambertus Josua Tallaut Universitas Tarumanagara
  • Ade Adhari Universitas Tarumanagara

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.38043/jah.v5i1.3426

Keywords:

Legal Certainty; Investigation; Corruption Crime; Corruption Eradication Commission

Abstract

Corruption crimes at the investigation stage, the authority is owned by the Prosecutor's Office, the Police, and the KPK. The authority of the KPK is regulated in Article 11 of the KPK Law. However, in practice, the Prosecutor's Office investigates corruption cases that fall under the authority of the KPK, which results in legal uncertainty. The purpose of this research is to understand the essence of legal certainty, and its application is related to the authority to investigate the KPK normatively, as well as to be investigated by the Attorney General's Office. The type of research used is juridical-empirical, the research approach is the law approach and the case approach. Certainty is a legal value that underlies the birth of legal principles and norms, therefore it must be upheld because the consequences are goals rather than law. The prosecutor's action in investigating the corruption case is the authority of the KPK to create legal uncertainty, which means it violates the value of legal certainty. The prosecutor's reasoning that Article 11 is just a norm is clearly not true, because Article 11 is part of a strategic criminal law formulation policy and also the case investigated by the Prosecutor's Office caused problems because it did not file an appeal against the decision of PT DKI Jakarta which was considered to have violated the sense of justice. Prosecutors' actions violate the value of legal certainty, injure the characteristics of the rule of law and injure the strategic city of criminal law policies at the formulation stage.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Arief, B.N. (2008). Masalah Penegakan Hukum dan Kebijakan Hukum Pidana dalam Penanggulangan Kejahatan. Jakarta: Kencana Prenada Media Group.

Diantha, I.M.P. (2019). Metodologi Penelitian Hukum Normatif dalam Justifikasi Teori Hukum. Jakarta: Kencana Prenada Media Group.

Hamzah, A. (1991). Korupsi di Indonesia. Jakarta: Penerbit Sinar Grafika.

Marzuki, P.M. (2011), Penelitian Hukum, Jakarta: Kencana.

____________. (2013). Penelitian Hukum: Edisi Revisi. Jakarta: Kencana Prenada Media Group.

Muhammad. A. (2004). Hukum dan Penelitian Hukum. Bandung: Citra Aditya Bakti.

Rahardjo, S. (2012). Ilmu Hukum. Bandung: Citra Aditya Bakti.

Astomo, P. (2014). “Perbandingan Pemikiran Hans Kelsen tentang Hukum dengan Gagasan Satjipto Rahardjo tentang Hukum Progresif Berbasis Teori Hukum”.Yustisia Edisi 90. 2014.

Arief, B.N & TT, Kebijakan Hukum Pidana (Penal Policy). Bahan Kuliah Program Magister Ilmu Hukum Universitas Diponegoro.

Gandra, M. (2020). “Kewenanangan Atribus, Delegsi dan Mandat”. Khazanah Hukum, Vo.2. No. 3: 92-99.

Indonesia. (2007). Laporan Singkat Rapat Dengar Pendapat Umum (RDPU). Komisi III DPR RI dengan DPP KNPI. AMPS FH UI dan Yayasan Komunal.

Koesoemo. C.R.T. (2017). Eksistensi Komisi Pemberantasan Korupsi (KPK) dalam Penananganan Penyidikan dan Penuntutan Tindak Pidana Korupsi. Lex Crimen Vol. VI, No. 1, Jan-Feb.

Latifah, M. (2012). “Legalitas Kewenangan Jaksa dalam Penyidikan Tindak Pidana Korupsi”. Jurnal Negara Hukum: Vol. 3. No. 1.

Nurhardianto, F. (2015). “Sistem Hukum dan Posisi Hukum Indonesia”. Jurnal TAPIs Vol. 11. No. 1.

Pesik, V.K. (2014). “Kewenangan KPK dalam Pemberantasan Tindak Pidana Korupsi”. Jurnal Lex et Societatis. Vol. II No. 6.

Peneliti, (2021), Wawancara. Jaksa Penyidik Satgassus pada Jampidsus, Kejaksaan Agung Republik Indonesia. Jakarta: Zoom Meeting. 12 Desember 2021.

Samples, J. (2002). James Madison and the Future of Limited Government. Washington D.C: Cato Institute.

Sugiarto, T. (2013). “Peranan Komisi Pemberantasan Korupsi (KPK) dalam Pemberantasan Tindak Pidana Korupsi di Indonesia”. Jurnal Cakrawala Hukum. Vol. 18, No. 1.

Soemarsono, M. (2007). “Negara Hukum Indonesia Ditinjau Dari Sudut Teori Tujuan Negara”. Jurnal Hukum dan Pembangunan Tahun Ke-37 No. 2.

Wantu, F.M. (2007). “Antinomi Dalam Penegakan Hukum Oleh Hakim”. Jurnal Berkala Mimbar Hukum. Vol. 19. Yogyakarta: Fakultas Hukum Universitas Gadjah Mada

Wijaya, M.H. (2015). “Karakteristik Konsep Negara Hukum Pancasila”. Jurnal Advokasi Vol. 5. No. 2.

Wagiman. (2016). “Nilai, Asas, Norma, dan Fakta Hukum: Upaya Menjelaskan dan Menjernihkan Pemahamannya”. Jurnal Filasafat Hukum Vol. 1, No. 1.

Published

2022-04-25

How to Cite

1.
Tallaut LJ, Adhari A. Kepastian Hukum Penerapan Kriteria Kewenangan Penyidikan Perkara Tindak Pidana Korupsi oleh Komisi Pemberantasan Korupsi Republik Indonesia. JAH [Internet]. 2022Apr.25 [cited 2022Aug.9];5(1):26-39. Available from: http://journal.undiknas.ac.id/index.php/JAH/article/view/3426

Issue

Section

ARTIKEL