Show simple item record

dc.contributor.advisorSyahrin, Alvi
dc.contributor.advisorAffila
dc.contributor.authorPanjaitan, Andry Kristanto
dc.date.accessioned2025-07-25T07:32:18Z
dc.date.available2025-07-25T07:32:18Z
dc.date.issued2025
dc.identifier.urihttps://repositori.usu.ac.id/handle/123456789/107506
dc.description.abstractThe problem of corruption in Indonesia is still a serious threat that has not been resolved, not only harming the country's finances but also having an impact on political and social problems. One of the main factors that cause high rates of corruption is that decisions often show significant disparities and often without strong consideration. In response to this criticism, the Supreme Court of the Republic of Indonesia issued Supreme Court Regulation (PERMA) Number 1 of 2020 concerning Criminal Guidelines Article 2 and Article 3 of the Law on the Eradication of Corruption to address the disparity in criminalization. This research is a normative juridical research conducted by researching through secondary data consisting of primary legal materials such as laws and regulations and also using secondary legal materials such as legal literature related to the formulation of problems in this study. To analyze this research, two approaches were used, namely the statutory approach and the case approach. The data collection method is carried out using a literature study procedure by conducting a review of written information from various sources related to the implementation of PERMA No. 1 of 2020 in imposing penalties for perpetrators of corruption crimes that harm the state's finances. The results of the study show that PERMA No. 1 of 2020 is present as a flexible criminal guideline where there is a criminal range as a reference. In its application, judges must go through six stages, namely determining the category of state financial losses, the level of error, impact, and profit, choosing the range of criminal imposition, considering aggravating and mitigating circumstances, imposing a penalty, and considering other provisions related to criminal imposition. Analysis of the rulings of corruption cases shows that the application of PERMA can reduce the disparity of verdicts, although there are still differences in the verdicts handed down, but still within the range regulated by PERMA and accompanied by clear considerations.en_US
dc.language.isoiden_US
dc.publisherUniversitas Sumatera Utaraen_US
dc.subjectPERMA No. 1 Tahun 2020en_US
dc.subjectDisparity in Decisionsen_US
dc.subjectCorruption Crimesen_US
dc.titleAnalisis Penerapan Perma No 1 Tahun 2020 Untuk Mengatasi Disparitas Putusan dalam Penjatuhan Pidana Bagi Pelaku Tindak Pidana Korupsi yang Merugikan Keuangan Negaraen_US
dc.typeThesisen_US
dc.identifier.nimNIM210200215
dc.identifier.nidnNIDN0031036302
dc.identifier.nidnNIDN0030127505
dc.description.pages203 Pagesen_US
dc.description.typeSkripsi Sarjanaen_US
dc.subject.sdgsSDGs 16. Peace, Justice And Strong Institutionsen_US


Files in this item

Thumbnail
Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record