Constitutional Court Urges DPR-Government to Revise the Tipikor Law

DOK BETWEEN

JAKARTA - The Constitutional Court (MK) encourages the House of Representatives and the government to conduct a comprehensive review and reformulate Law Number 31 of 1999 concerning the Eradication of Corruption Crimes (Tipikor Law).

The impetus was embodied in the legal consideration of the Constitutional Court's decision on Case Number 142/PUU-XXII/2024 regarding the material test of Article 2 paragraph (1) and Article 3 of the Corruption Law which was pronounced by Constitutional Justice M. Guntur Hamzah.

"Through this quo (this) decision, the Court confirms that the law-makers should immediately prioritize a comprehensive review and open opportunities to reform the Tipikor Law, especially with regard to the norms of Article 2 paragraph (1) and the norms of Article 3 of the Tipikor Law," said Guntur Hamzah as reported by ANTARA, Wednesday, December 17.

The court conveyed five points that need to be considered by the DPR and the government as law makers in formulating the Tipikor Law again.

First, the DPR and the government need to immediately review the norms of Article 2 paragraph (1) and Article 3 of the Tipikor Law comprehensively.

Second, if the results of the study require revision or improvement to the norms of the two articles, the DPR and the government can prioritize the revision or improvement in question.

Third, if the revision or correction needs to be made, the law-makers are asked to take it into account carefully and maturely so that the implications of the revision or correction do not reduce the legal policy of eradicating tipikor as an extraordinary crime.

Fourth, the Constitutional Court encourages the substance of the criminal sanction norms to be formulated in a more legal certainty so that it can reduce the potential for abuse of authority in eradicating tipikor.

"Five, the revision or improvement involves the participation of all parties concerned (attention) to the agenda of eradicating corruption with the implementation of the principle of meaningful public participation," added Judge Guntur.

Before there were changes to the Tipikor Law, the Constitutional Court reminded law enforcement officials to be more careful and cautious in taking legal action against perpetrators suspected of corruption.

"This includes the application of the principle of business judgement rule which is in line with the assessment of good faith which is related to the legal relationship of civil law to avoid the application of uncertain and just law in balancing the rights of the perpetrators who are suspected of committing corruption with the spirit of eradicating corruption," he added.

Article 2 paragraph (1) of the Corruption Law regulates the criminal penalty for the act of every person against the law enriching himself, others, or a corporation that can harm the finances or economy of the country.

Anyone who violates this article is threatened with life imprisonment or a minimum of four years and a maximum of 20 years in prison, as well as a minimum fine of Rp. 200 million and a maximum of Rp. 1 billion.

Meanwhile, Article 3 of the Corruption Law regulates criminal offenses for anyone with the aim of benefiting themselves, others, or a corporation by abusing their authority, opportunity, or means because of their position or position so as to harm the finances or economy of the country.

Violators of the article in question are threatened with life imprisonment or imprisonment for a minimum of one year and a maximum of 20 years and/or a fine of at least Rp. 50 million and a maximum of Rp. 1 billion.

The court actually rejected the case filed by the three citizens, namely the former President Director of Perum Perikanan Indonesia Syahril Japarin, former employee of PT Chevron Pacific Indonesia Kukuh Kertasafari, and former Governor of Southeast Sulawesi Nur Alam.

The three are former corruption defendants who have been charged with Article 2 paragraph (1) and Article 3 of the Corruption Law.

The Constitutional Court broke with the arguments of the applicants. According to the Court, there is no constitutional issue with the norms in the two articles tested.

Although it rejected the petition, the Constitutional Court can understand that in the application of these norms, there is often a discourse related to the potential for non-single interpretations and inconsistency of law enforcement officials in dealing with corruption.

Therefore, because the formulation of the criminal sanction norms is not the authority of the Constitutional Court to formulate it, the constitutional panel of judges conveys a number of affirmations to the law makers through the legal consideration of the verdict.

Moreover, the Tipikor Law is currently included in the national legislation program for 2025-2029.