Garuda - Garba Rujukan Digital

Menakar Perlindungan Justice Colaborator Satria, Hariman
Jurnal Konstitusi Vol 13, No 2 (2016)
Publisher : Mahkamah Konstitusi Republik Indonesia

Corruption is one form of systematic organized crimes performed with complicated modus operandi. Disclosing of this crime, in addition to requiring special equipment, also needs a certain method. One of the methods is using actors who collaborate or justice collaborator. The provisions on justice collaboratororiginally referred to Article 10 paragraph (2) of Law No. 13 of 2006 on Protection of Witnesses and Victims –but there are indications that these provisions do not provide protection to the justice collaborator. Because even though he plays as a collaborating actor, it does not result in a loss of authority of the state to prosecute the concerned. This provision is considered violating the principle of lex certain criminal law, for its ambiguity and multiple interpretations. Constitutional Court in its decision No. 42/PUU-VIII/2010states that Article 10 paragraph (2) regarding a quoprovision is not contrary to the 1945 Constitution. Without realizing it, Constitutional Court has come affirming the lack of protection on the collaborating actors. The fate of justice collaboratorthen finds the clarity in Article 10 paragraph (1) of Law No. 31 of 2014 on Protection on Witnesses and Victims. In the future, with reference to a quo provision, there is no guarantee to the justice collaboratorthat he would not be prosecuted either criminal or civil, except for statements or testimony that is not done in good faith. Besides regulated under legislation of Witnesses and Victims Protection, protection of the justice collaboratorhas also been set in UNTOC 2000 and UNCAC 2003.

Ke Arah Pergeseran Beban Pembuktian Satria, Hariman
Integritas : Jurnal Antikorupsi Vol. 3 No. 1 (2017): INTEGRITAS Volume 03 Nomor 1 Tahun 2017
Publisher : Komisi Pemberantasan Korupsi

Pemberantasan tindak pidana korupsi di Indonesia lebih difokuskan pada proses peradilan pidana. Proses tersebut bermula dari tahap penyidikan, pembuktian, penuntutan hingga vonis hakim di pengadilan. Pembuktian adalah tahapan yang sangat esensial baik kepada terdakwa maupun penuntut umum. Dikatakan demikian karena ketika terjadi silang sengkarut pendapat antara terdakwa dan penuntut umum maka pembuktianlah yang akan menjadi rujukan hakim dalam menjatuhkan putusan. Dalam pembuktian dikenal beberap teori yakni teori positif, teori conviction intme, teori conviction rasionee dan teori negatif. Teori negatif ini digunakan dalam Pasal 183 KUHAP. Teori-teori tersebut menekankan bahwa beban pembuktian tindak pidana adalah ada pada penuntut umum. Hal ini selaras denga asas actori incumbit onus probandi atinya siapa yang menuntut maka dia yang membuktikan. Dalam perkembangannya peraturan anti korupsi Indonesia memperkenalkan pembalikan pembuktian, khusus pada gratifikasi yang dianggap suap sebagaimana disebutkan dalam Pasal 12B jo Pasal 37. Selain itu dalam peraturan anti korupsi juga memperluas episentrum alat bukti petunjuk dalam KUHAP. Perluasan ini sasarannya adalah untuk memudahkan penyidikan dan pembuktian tindak pidana korupsi. Pembalikan pembuktian juga diadopsi dalam peraturan anti pencucian uang. Bahkan dalam peraturan a quo mengenalkan prinsip pembalikan pembuktian murni, sebagaimana ditegaskan dalam Pasal 77 jo Pasal 78. Jadi pembuktian yang awalnya hanya menjadi domain jaksa (beban pembuktian konvensional) kemudian mengalami pergeseran (shifting) kepada terdakwa (pembalikan beban pembuktian Ã¢â‚¬â€œ reversal of burden of proof). Prinsip pembalikan pembuktian pada dasarnya terbagi dua yakni pembalikan pembuktian murni (absolut) yang dikenalkan dalam tindak pidana pencucian uang dan pembalikan pembuktian bersifat terbatas dan berimbang yang dikenalkan dalam tindak pidana korupsi.

POLITIK HUKUM TINDAK PIDANA POLITIK UANG DALAM PEMILIHAN UMUM DI INDONESIA Satria, Hariman
Integritas : Jurnal Antikorupsi Vol. 5 No. 1 (2019): INTEGRITAS Volume 05 Nomor 1 Tahun 2019
Publisher : Komisi Pemberantasan Korupsi

Criminal acts of money politics are regulated in Article 523 paragraph (1) to paragraph (3) Law No. 7 of 2017 concerning Elections which is divided into three categories, namely during the campaign, the period of calm and the period of voting. When noted, there are relatively similarities the elements of actus reus in paragraph (1) to paragraph (3) in the article. As for the rea method, it was formulated deliberately. Prevention of criminal acts of money politics can be done through the criminology perspective crime prevention doctrine which focuses on five theories, namely abolitionistic theory, emphasizing the driving factors of crime; a moralistic theory that emphasizes community enlightenment through moral messages; and the theory of primary, secondary and tertiary prevention. Political parties should participate in criminal liability when involved in acts of money politics by referring to the identification theory. Keywords: Legal Politics, Criminal Act, Money Politics, General Election

Pembuktian Kesalahan Korporasi dalam Tindak Pidana Korupsi Satria, Hariman
Integritas : Jurnal Antikorupsi Vol. 4 No. 2 (2018): INTEGRITAS Volume 04 Nomor 2 Tahun 2018
Publisher : Komisi Pemberantasan Korupsi

Di Indonesia ada 2 putusan pengadilan terkait dengan pemidanaan korporasi dalam tindak pidana korupsi yakni Putusan PT GJW dan Putusan PT CND. Dalam kedua putusan itu, kesalahan (mens rea) korporasi dinyatakan terbukti sehingga dikenai pertanggungjawaban pidana. Kajian ini difokuskan pada cara pembuktian kesalahan korporasi dalam tindak pidana korupsi. Untuk mengurai permasalahan maka kajian ini menggunakan metode penelitian normatif dengan dua pendekatan yakni pendekatan kasus dan pendekatan konseptual. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa: pertama, dalam menentukan kesalahan korporasi, menitikberatkan pada kesalahan yang dilakukan oleh pengurus korporasi, seperti direktur. Sehingga kesalahan direktur adalah juga sebagai kesalahan korporasi. Kedua, bila dikaitkan dengan teori pertanggungjawaban pidana korporasi maka majelis hakim pada dua perkara korupsi tersebut telah mengadopsi teori identifikasi. Ketiga, perbuatan melawan hukum yang merugikan keuangan negara dan dilakukan oleh direktur sebagai pengurus dianggap sama dengan yang dilakukan oleh korporasi. Keempat, mengenai sanksi pidana pokok, dalam dua putusan a quo adalah sama yakni pidana denda. Kelima, dalam putusan PT GJW selain pidana pokok, korporasi juga masih dikenai pidana tambahan berupa penutupan seluruh atau sebagian perusahaan. Sedangkan dalam putusan PT CND tidak ada sama sekali sanksi pidana tambahan yang dikenakan kepada terdakwa. Keenam, kedua putusan tersebut, tidak memuat pidana tambahan berupa pembayaran uang pengganti, padahal sebagaimana diketahui bahwa salah satu cara memulihkan kerugian keuangan negara adalah melalui pidana pembayaran uang pengganti.

RESTORATIVE JUSTICE: PARADIGMA BARU PERADILAN PIDANA Satria, Hariman
Jurnal Media Hukum Vol 25, No 1, June 2018
Publisher : Fakultas Hukum Universitas Muhammadiyah Yogyakarta

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.18196/jmh.2018.0107.111-123

Direction of criminal justice in Indonesia is currently experiencing a shift from retributive to restorative-rehabilitative or daad-dader-strafrecht or model of balance of interests. This is confirmed by Laws No. 11 of 2012 on Juvenile Justice System, which states in Article 6 to Article 8 that emphasizes the concept of restorative justice through diversion. Both of these concepts allow the settlement of children out of the criminal justice. However, not all criminal offenses committed by children can be settled out of court (diversion) unless two conditions are met: imprisonment for a criminal offense under seven years and is not a repetition of criminal offenses (recidivism). The essences of restorative justice are: First, in the settlement of children, it is necessary that the offenders and their families and victims and their families can sit together to discuss the settlement of issues including reparations to victims (restitution in integrum). Second, the essence of restorative justice is to give punishment to the offenders but the punishment is didactic, in order to benefit to both of the perpetrator and the victims.Â This is in line with an adagio â€œdelinquens per iram provocatus puniri debet mitiusâ€. Third, regulation of a quo using two approaches: i.e. victims and offenders mediation approaches as implemented in North America as well as approach that emphasizes restitution and reparation (court based restitutive and reparative measure), as practiced in the United Kingdom

Kebijakan Kriminal Pencegahan Korupsi Pelayanan Publik Satria, Hariman Satria
Integritas : Jurnal Antikorupsi Vol. 6 No. 2 (2020): INTEGRITAS: Jurnal Antikorupsi
Publisher : Komisi Pemberantasan Korupsi

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.32697/integritas.v6i2.660

The widespread of corruption in public services is not only triggered by its poor system but also by the moral vulnerability of the state officials. This study aims to give a comprehensive account of the prevention of corruption in public services, specifically in the criminal policy domain. The study presents normative legal research through statute and conceptual approaches. In line with the corruption issue, the government needs to take adequate and relevant strategies to eradicate corruption. They include adopting crime prevention theory such as situational crime prevention, enhancing ethical and professional employee culture through good corporate governance, imposing strict sanctions for unprofessional employees, maximizing incentives for professional employees, disseminating massive and systematic impact of corruption in natural resource sectors, implementing an integrated online-based licensing system, reforming the public service, and improving the license approval process.

Menakar Perlindungan Justice Colaborator Hariman Satria
Jurnal Konstitusi Vol 13, No 2 (2016)
Publisher : The Constitutional Court of the Republic of Indonesia

Corruption is one form of systematic organized crimes performed with complicated modus operandi. Disclosing of this crime, in addition to requiring special equipment, also needs a certain method. One of the methods is using actors who collaborate or justice collaborator. The provisions on justice collaboratororiginally referred to Article 10 paragraph (2) of Law No. 13 of 2006 on Protection of Witnesses and Victims –but there are indications that these provisions do not provide protection to the justice collaborator. Because even though he plays as a collaborating actor, it does not result in a loss of authority of the state to prosecute the concerned. This provision is considered violating the principle of lex certain criminal law, for its ambiguity and multiple interpretations. Constitutional Court in its decision No. 42/PUU-VIII/2010states that Article 10 paragraph (2) regarding a quoprovision is not contrary to the 1945 Constitution. Without realizing it, Constitutional Court has come affirming the lack of protection on the collaborating actors. The fate of justice collaboratorthen finds the clarity in Article 10 paragraph (1) of Law No. 31 of 2014 on Protection on Witnesses and Victims. In the future, with reference to a quo provision, there is no guarantee to the justice collaboratorthat he would not be prosecuted either criminal or civil, except for statements or testimony that is not done in good faith. Besides regulated under legislation of Witnesses and Victims Protection, protection of the justice collaboratorhas also been set in UNTOC 2000 and UNCAC 2003.

The Principle of Legality in Criminal Act of Terrorism Hariman Satria
Jurnal Cita Hukum Vol 5, No 2 (2017)
Publisher : Fakultas Syariah dan Hukum, UIN Syarif Hidayatullah Jakarta

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.15408/jch.v5i2.4959

The trial of Imam Samudera cs uses Perppu No 1 2002 on Combating Criminal Acts ofTerrorism. This regulation was made after Bali bombing 1. So the criminal provisions weremade retroactively. Similarly, in cases of serious human rights violations in East Timor, theperpetrators use retroactive laws. Enforcement of the criminal provisions retroactively alsomade by the ad hoc international criminal court through Nurenberg Trial and Tokyo Trial in1945. Enforcement of the criminal provisions aimed at fulfilling the principle of justice, thatthe convict by violating the principle of legality is not fair but not punishing guilty of seriouscrimes which did not fare much better. Strictly speaking, the principle of legality can crisis. DOI: 10.15408/jch.v5i2.4959

RESTORATIVE JUSTICE: PARADIGMA BARU PERADILAN PIDANA Hariman Satria
Jurnal Media Hukum Vol 25, No 1, June 2018
Publisher : Fakultas Hukum Universitas Muhammadiyah Yogyakarta

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.18196/jmh.2018.0107.111-123

Direction of criminal justice in Indonesia is currently experiencing a shift from retributive to restorative-rehabilitative or daad-dader-strafrecht or model of balance of interests. This is confirmed by Laws No. 11 of 2012 on Juvenile Justice System, which states in Article 6 to Article 8 that emphasizes the concept of restorative justice through diversion. Both of these concepts allow the settlement of children out of the criminal justice. However, not all criminal offenses committed by children can be settled out of court (diversion) unless two conditions are met: imprisonment for a criminal offense under seven years and is not a repetition of criminal offenses (recidivism). The essences of restorative justice are: First, in the settlement of children, it is necessary that the offenders and their families and victims and their families can sit together to discuss the settlement of issues including reparations to victims (restitution in integrum). Second, the essence of restorative justice is to give punishment to the offenders but the punishment is didactic, in order to benefit to both of the perpetrator and the victims. This is in line with an adagio “delinquens per iram provocatus puniri debet mitius”. Third, regulation of a quo using two approaches: i.e. victims and offenders mediation approaches as implemented in North America as well as approach that emphasizes restitution and reparation (court based restitutive and reparative measure), as practiced in the United Kingdom

PERLUASAN MAKNA KERUGIAN KEUANGAN NEGARA DALAM KORUPSI IZIN USAHA PERTAMBANGAN Hariman Satria
Jurnal Yudisial Vol 13, No 2 (2020): VINCULUM JURIS
Publisher : Komisi Yudisial RI

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.29123/jy.v13i2.417

ABSTRAKDalam Putusan Nomor 2633 K/Pid.Sus/2018, majelis hakim memperluas makna kerugian keuangan negara dengan menambahkan kerusakan lingkungan dan biaya pemulihan melalui scientific or expert evidence. Permasalahan yang akan dijawab adalah bagaimanakah konteks kerugian keuangan negara yang maknanya diperluas menjadi kerusakan lingkungan dan biaya pemulihan dalam putusan a quo. Jenis penelitian ini merupakan penelitian hukum normatif yang menggunakan analisis yuridis kualitatif. Untuk menemukan jawaban permasalahan, penulis menggunakan metode pendekatan kasus dan pendekatan konseptual. Temuan dari penelitian ini adalah sebagai berikut: (1) agar kerusakan lingkungan dan biaya pemulihannya dapat dikategorikan sebagai kerugian keuangan negara, maka perbuatan mesti dimaknai sebagai tindakan yang melanggar Undang-Undang Anti Korupsi. Kemudian menempatkan lingkungan hidup, kekayaan negara, dan keuangan negara sebagai satu kesatuan; (2) perluasan makna kerugian keuangan negara tersebut mendasarkan pada pendapat ahli sebagai expert evidence; (3) perluasan makna tersebut sejalan dengan Peraturan Badan Pemeriksa Keuangan Nomor 1 Tahun 2017 tentang Standar Pemeriksaan Keuangan Negara; dan (4) dalam memperluas makna kerugian keuangan negara, majelis hakim menggunakan interpretasi doktriner. Kata kunci: kerugian keuangan negara; penyalahgunaan wewenang; izin usaha pertambangan. ABSTRACT In Decision Number 2633 K/Pid.Sus/2018, the panel of judges expanded the meaning of state nancial losses by adding environmental damage and recovery costs through scienti c or expert evidence. The question that will be answered is how to understand the context of state nancial losses whose meaning is extended to environmental damage and recovery costs in the a quo decision. This type of research is a normative legal research that uses qualitative juridical analysis. To nd answers to problems, the authors use a case approach method and a conceptual approach. The ndings of this study are: (1) in order for environmental damage and recovery costs to be categorized as losses to state nances, actions must be interpreted as actions that violate the Anti-Corruption Law. Then put the environment, state assets and state nances as one unit; (2) expanding the meaning of state nancial losses based on expert opinion as expert evidence; (3) the expansion of meaning is in line with the Audit Board of the Republic of Indonesia Regulation Number 1 of 2017 concerning State Financial Audit Standards; and (4) in expanding the meaning of state nancial loss, the panel of judges uses a doctrinal interpretation. Keywords: state nancial losses; power abuse; mining business license.

Title

Found 15 Documents
Search

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Title Search

Found 15 Documents Search

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Title

Found 15 Documents
Search