| dc.description.abstract | Corruption is one of the extraordinary crime (Extra Ordinary Crimes),
because it has damaged not only the State 's financial and economic potential of the
State, but also has devastated the pillars of socio-cultural, moral, political, and legal
order and national security. Corruption in the response and eradication no longer be
done in a regular, but required extraordinary means (Extra Ordinary Enforcement).
The problems discussed in this study are as follows: 1. How does the policy
formulation of criminal sanctions against perpetrators of corruption in an effort to
eradicate corruption in Indonesia ?; 2. How does the application of criminal
sanctions against the perpetrators of corruption when viewed in the formulation of
the offense in article 2 and article 3 of the Law No. 31 of 1999 Jo. Act No. 20 of2001
on the eradication of corruption
The type of research conducted in this study is the normative juridical done by
examining library materials is called secondary data and also with legal research
literature. The nature of this research is descriptive analysis aimed to describe,
inventory and analyze the theories and regulations relating to the issues in this
research. Data collection techniques used in this study was through literature
research (library research) data obtained through the study of literature shall be
construed or interpreted to obtain the suitability of the application of the rules
associated with the issue being studied and systematized, resulting in a classification
that is consistent with the problems in this study .
Based on the results of this study against the perpetrators of corruption that
can potentially harm the state's financial I economic state prevention and eradication
pursued through criminal sanctions policy formulation. Policy formulation is a
criminal sanction in formulating policy and establishes criminal sanctions against
perpetrators of corruption in which, in order to achieve more effective for preventing
and combating corruption, UUPTPK establishes criminal sanctions against
perpetrators of criminal threats by determining the specific minimum, criminal
penalties higher, and the threat of the death penalty which is a criminal and load
weighting imprisonment for perpetrators of corruption that can not pay the
additional criminal restitution of state losses. Sanctions in the legislation combating
corruption is intended that the perpetrator did not commit a crime or to repeat the
crime and the deterrent effect on offenders.
Prevention and eradication of corruption through a policy formulation in
addition to formulate and establish criminal sanctions in the UUPTPK, the
application of criminal sanctions against perpetrators of corruption are also
required. Application of sanctions against the perpetrators of the offense can be seen
based on the formulation of article 2 and article 3 UUPTP K, where in the article may
unlawfully harm the state 's financial/economic state. Criminal sanction~ imposed on
the perpetrators of corruption, especially in some of the Medan District Court
decisions is imprisonment, criminal fines, imprisonment and the death penalty can be
imposed under certain circumstances: Appropriate formulation of the offense in article 2 and 3 UUPTPK, against the perpetrators of corruption even though the
results have been returned to the country of corruption, the perpetrators of
corruption remains submitted to the court and remain convicted. Indemnification of
state's financial/ economic state does not abolish convicted criminals as referred to
in article 2 and article 3. Indemnification of the state/economic state is one factor
that mitigates punishment for the perpetrators. | en_US |
