Penjatuhan Sanksi Pidana Terhadap Tindak Pidana Korupsi yang Dilakukan oleh Korporasi (Studi Putusan Nomor 57/Pid.Sus.TPK/2016/PN.Pbr.)
Butar-Butar, Andreas Prayuda Aprindo
MetadataShow full item record
One of the cases of criminal acts of corporate corruption can be seen in Decision Number Pid.Sus.TPK / 2016 / PN.Pbr. In the criminal case this decision is related to the power plant procurement project in Bengkalis Regency, Riau. The defendant namely Ir. H. Herliyan Saleh, M.Sc is a former vice regent of Bengkalis Regency from 2010-2015. In his position as deputy regent of Bengkalis Regency, the defendant is also a shareholder of PT. Bumi Laksamana Jaya. So in the execution of the power plant procurement project, the defendant jointly committed a criminal act of corruption. Such a situation will bring up a legal argument regarding the responsibility of the defendant who in this case was charged by the Prosecutor's Office for committing a criminal act of corruption in a corporate manner. The research conducted is normative legal research. Researchers used a data collection tool in the form of a Literature Study or Documentary Study. Literature research conducted on Decision Number 57 / Pid.Sus.TPK / 2016 / PN.Pbr. The results of the study showed that accountability for corruption was based on the provisions of Law No. 31 of 1999 jo. Law No. 20 of 2001, the types of criminal convictions that can be carried out by judges against corruption convicted criminals are as follows: Against People Who Commit Criminal Death Corruption; Criminal Prison; Additional Crimes. Against Criminal Acts Committed By Or On Behalf Of A Corporation. Corporate punishment is usually embraced by what is called "bipunishment provisionsi". Witness testimony presented at the trial which basically justifies the existence of a criminal act of corruption committed by the defendant; The evidence in court there are 84 (eighty-four pieces of evidence which are generally in the form of documents presented at the trial; the alleged article in this case the Public Prosecutor has denied Article 3 in conjunction with Article 18 of Law Number 31 of 1999 as amended and coupled with Law Number 20 Year 2001 Concerning Eradication of Corruption in conjunction with Article 55 paragraph (1) to the Criminal Code 1. Consideration of Sociological Law Background of the Defendant who in this decision was a district head of Bengkalis Riau in the period of 2010-2015; criminal corruption which results in state losses both in the state finances and the economy of the state; the condition of the defendant who is in a healthy condition and not under control; the religion of the defendant in this case can be seen in a passionate ruling "based on the Almighty God".
- Skripsi Sarjana