The case of the Hajj Quota of Gus Yaqut, an Expert in Soroti the Basis of the Corruption Charge of Rp622 Million

Photo: Special

JAKARTA - The case of alleged corruption related to the policy of distributing additional Hajj quotas, which dragged the name of former Minister of Religion Yaqut Cholil Qoumas (Gus Yaqut), is still attracting public attention.

This attention has increased after the reading of the indictment, which marked the start of the trial of the case. Criminal Law Expert of the Police Science Institute (STIK-PTIK), Dr. Giovanni Christy, assessed that the construction of the charges against Gus Yaqut needed to be carefully viewed in the right criminal law perspective.

DIA explained that criminal law should be based on a clear formulation related to prohibited acts and conditions that cause the act to be punishable.

"The problem in the case of Gus Yaqut, as in the Tipikor case in general, which is also seen in the cases of Ibrahim Arief and Nadiem regarding the consequences or impacts of a policy, is then used to draw conclusions that a crime has occurred, without clarity regarding the criminal act that has actually occurred in the indictment," he explained.

According to Dr. Giovanni, the affirmation of the difference between acts, the fulfillment of delicts, and the impact of acts is important in public policy cases. Not every decision or policy that later has certain consequences can immediately be qualified as a criminal act.

"The consequence is not automatically identical to the occurrence of a criminal act. Although a consequence can appear in the form of losses, it is not enough to prove the existence of a criminal act. In cases that concern state financial losses, losses must be placed as a result element that is directly sourced from acts expressly prohibited by law, so it still requires proof of a real causal relationship, not just a projection. "he said.

This view is relevant in the case of additional Hajj quotas in 2024 which ensnared Gus Yaqut. The Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK) said that the state's losses in the case could potentially reach IDR 622 billion. However, the amount of this figure is not the only issue that needs to be tested.

On the other hand, it is necessary to question the basis of the calculation and how the cause-and-effect relationship between the losses claimed and the acts alleged against Gus Yaqut. The issue in this case is not merely about the policy of quota allocation which has an impact, but about whether from the beginning there is a criminal act that can be proven concretely and can be held accountable to the defendant.