Analisis Yuridis Atas Vonis Bebas Pelaku yang Meminjamkan Perusahaan dalam Pengadaan Barang dan Jasa yang Tersangkut Tindak Pidana Korupsi (Studi Kasus Putusan Nomor 23/Pid.Sus-TPK/2020/PNBna)

Abstract

The act of borrowing a company flog contains potential legal violations of the law, one of which is violating the principles and ethics of procurement as stipulated in Article 6-7 of Presidential Regulation No. 16 of 2018 on procurement of government Goods/Services. This research aims to analyze the legal consequences of borrowing a company according to Indonesian civil law, criminal liability due to the abuse of anthority against the owner of the company in the implementation of tender procurement of goods and services, and the judge's consideration in deciding the acquittal against the defendant in the case No. 23/ Pid. Sus-TPK/2020/PNBn.

This descriptive analytical research is normative juridical legal research. The research employs secondary data consisting of primary, secondary, and tertiary legal materials. Study of literature is employed as a data collection technique and tool. Data obtained are analyzed using a qualitative analysis method.

The research results indicate that the practices of borrowing a company's name in the procurement of goods and services have the potential to violate the law, civilly, criminally and administratively. If the abuse of authority in the tender implementation of goods and services procurement causes the criminal act of corruption, the owner of the company can also be held criminally accountable. although in this case, the owner of the company is acquitted by the judge.

The research concludes that the legal consequence of borrowing a company's name, according to civil law, is that the owner of the company that lends the company to another party is held accountable for losses during the procurement process of goods and services, including violations of anction procedures that can lead to unfair competition during the auction process. The criminal liability due to abuse of authority committed by the owner of the company in the implementation of procurement of goods and services is regulated in Article 2 and Article 3 of Law No. 20 of 2001 on amendments to Law No. 31 of 1999 on the eradication of corruption. The judge's consideration in deciding the acquittal against the defendant in the case No. 23/ Pid.Sus-TPK/2020/PNBno is that the defendant is released from all claims, in this case the panel of judges has a different opinion which causes an acquittal of the defendant. Therefore, it is expected that everyone should reconsider the practice of borrowing the company flag in the procurement of goverment goods/services so that it can decrease the change of corruption practices within the government. In addition, it is necessary to be objective in the

imposition of criminal sanctions to perpetrators of corruption in the procurement

of goods/services so that criminal sanctions can be imposed properly.