Kewenangan Komisi Pemberantasan Korupsi dalam Penanggulangan Tindak Pidana Korupsi Berdasarkan Undang-Undang Nomor 30 Tahun 2002 Tentang Komisi Pemberantasan Korupsi
Total View This Week0
Total View This Week0
Institusion
Universitas Sumatera Utara
Author
Nasution, Febria Damai Yanti (STUDENT ID : 077005071)
(LECTURER ID : 0031036302)
(LECTURER ID : 0001047403)
(LECTURER ID : 0011056302)
(LECTURER ID : 0031036302)
(LECTURER ID : 0001047403)
(LECTURER ID : 0011056302)
Subject
Authority
Datestamp
2022-12-12 08:02:37
Abstract :
The existence of corruption removal commission is an attempt done by the government to remove the corruption criminal act which is increasingly developing in Indonesia. KPK is an independent institution given a special authority to overcome the problem of corruption criminal act. This commission was established when the society need to have the corruption strictly overcome, without delay, transparent, and with a public accountability that can be accounted to all strata of society. The Purpose of this analytical descriptive normative legal study is to find out the authority owned by the KPK in removing the corruption criminal act and to analyze the tempts that can be done by the KPK in the prevention of corruption criminal act. The data for this study were the existing legal norms related to the authority of KPK in removing corruption criminal act and preventing the incident of corruption obtained from library research which were then analyzed and systemized The result of this study shows that, first, there are several formulations of articles such as Articles 9, 40, 42, 43, 50, 51 and 71 of Law No.30/2002 revealing the extraordinary authority of KPK which surpasses the authority owned by the other law enforcement agencies even go beyond the authority of public prosecutor in investigating and charging the corruption criminal act, that if KPK's authority is not given a clear description, a conflict of authority will occur between KPK and the other law enforcement agencies. Second, the attempt done by KPK in removing corruption is preventive and repressive in nature. This preventive attempt done by KPK is stated in Article 6 (d) of Law No.30/2002 and details of prevention is regulated in Article 13 of Law No.30/2002. The repressive attempt stated is to frame the leading corruption and when proven he or she will be seriously prosecuted by KPK under the existing corruption-related regulation of legislation. For this reason, it is suggested that, first, KPK should more improve its quality in removing corruption, considering the authority given by the law to KPK as an independent institution which specially handles the problems of corruption in order to make the society can believe more in KPK performance in settling the cases of corruption. Second, control and self innocence of corruption bee men the main priority for the KPK in electing the members of commission before they handle the problem about an individual or an institution assumed to have been involved in the case of corruption.
The existence of corruption removal commission is an attempt done by the government to remove the corruption criminal act which is increasingly developing in Indonesia. KPK is an independent institution given a special authority to overcome the problem of corruption criminal act. This commission was established when the society need to have the corruption strictly overcome, without delay, transparent, and with a public accountability that can be accounted to all strata of society. The Purpose of this analytical descriptive normative legal study is to find out the authority owned by the KPK in removing the corruption criminal act and to analyze the tempts that can be done by the KPK in the prevention of corruption criminal act. The data for this study were the existing legal norms related to the authority of KPK in removing corruption criminal act and preventing the incident of corruption obtained from library research which were then analyzed and systemized The result of this study shows that, first, there are several formulations of articles such as Articles 9, 40, 42, 43, 50, 51 and 71 of Law No.30/2002 revealing the extraordinary authority of KPK which surpasses the authority owned by the other law enforcement agencies even go beyond the authority of public prosecutor in investigating and charging the corruption criminal act, that if KPK's authority is not given a clear description, a conflict of authority will occur between KPK and the other law enforcement agencies. Second, the attempt done by KPK in removing corruption is preventive and repressive in nature. This preventive attempt done by KPK is stated in Article 6 (d) of Law No.30/2002 and details of prevention is regulated in Article 13 of Law No.30/2002. The repressive attempt stated is to frame the leading corruption and when proven he or she will be seriously prosecuted by KPK under the existing corruption-related regulation of legislation. For this reason, it is suggested that, first, KPK should more improve its quality in removing corruption, considering the authority given by the law to KPK as an independent institution which specially handles the problems of corruption in order to make the society can believe more in KPK performance in settling the cases of corruption. Second, control and self innocence of corruption bee men the main priority for the KPK in electing the members of commission before they handle the problem about an individual or an institution assumed to have been involved in the case of corruption.
Download
book
BibTex
Latex, Jabref
cloud_download
Original Resource
url resource Institution
