JAKARTA - Attorney General ST Burhanuddin threw a discourse about corruption under Rp. 50 million not being processed as long as the corrupted state money was returned.
After being highlighted by many parties, ranging from anti-corruption activists to even the KPK leadership, the Attorney General's Office conveyed his clarification.
The following clarification was conveyed in a written statement by the Head of the AGO, Leonard Eben Ezer Simanjuntak, to reporters, Friday, January 28.
In connection with several reports that developed in several mass media regarding "The Attorney General Calls Corruption Under Rp 50 Million Enough to Return State Losses", through this Press Release, the Attorney General's Center for Legal Information conveys several things as follows:
First, we would like to convey that at a Working Meeting with Commission III of the DPR RI on Monday, January 17, 2022, several members of Commission III of the DPR RI gave questions to the Attorney General of the Republic of Indonesia.
Member of Commission III of the House of Representatives, Mr. Benny K. Harman, who in essence conveyed to the Attorney General of the Republic of Indonesia, “Corruption cases under 1 million should not be processed. But until now, we have data that many corruption cases under Rp1 million are still being processed. This is what we call our law blunt up and sharp down. It would be better if Mr. JA made a policy so that corruption cases under 1 million were not processed. It is better to process big cases than small cases.”
Furthermore, Member of Commission III of the DPR RI, Mr. Supriansa, also conveyed to the Attorney General of the Republic of Indonesia, "There are not a few cases of village funds with a low value, which we assume is only a difference of 7 million, a difference of 5 million. Come to think of it, if the value is that small, I expect Jampidsus to have a breakthrough in refunding money rather than this guy's prison. It costs more to feed him inside than what we're after. After all, this nation also has limitations regarding the availability of prisons that are already over capacity. It's amazing if we force our way in but the value is low. Is there a solution or do we have to go straight to jail and imprison people even though the value is quite small?”
For these two questions, the Attorney General of the Republic of Indonesia at the Working Meeting on Thursday, January 27, 2022, explained that in cases of Village Funds where the losses were not too large and the actions were not carried out continuously (keep going), it was recommended that they be resolved administratively. by returning the loss and providing guidance to the perpetrators through the Inspectorate not to repeat their actions.
Furthermore, the Attorney General explained, regarding the corruption case with a state financial loss of Rp. 1,000,000 (one million rupiah), according to the data we received, there was 1 (one) investigation carried out by the Pontianak Police in the case of Illegal Charges (Pungli). involving a referee with a value of Rp. 2,200,000, - (two million two hundred thousand rupiah) and currently the case is still in the Pre-Prosecution stage at the Pontianak District Attorney.
The case is not related to state financial losses, but is related to efforts to eradicate illegal levies (saber extortion). Therefore, the handling is expected to be carried out professionally with due regard to conscience and/or using other instruments other than the Corruption Law.
As for the corruption case related to state financial losses, the Attorney General's Office has given an appeal to its staff for corruption crimes whose state financial losses are below Rp. the legal process is fast, simple and low cost.
As for the explanation above, it is the response of the Attorney General of the Republic of Indonesia and the general appeal to think together and find the right solution in taking action against corruption that touches both the perpetrators and the community at the grassroots level, which is generally done because of ignorance or ignorance. there is a deliberate attempt to steal state money, and the value of the state's financial losses is relatively small.
For example, a village head without training on how to manage and account for state finances must manage village funds worth IDR 1 billion for the development of his village. This of course will hurt community justice, if corruption is taken, even though it is only an administrative error (for example, overpaying to builders or handyman assistants in the implementation of development in his village and the value is relatively small and the Village Head does not enjoy the money at all. ).
Another example, a salary treasurer makes a salary value that is greater than what should be received by several employees in a government agency. This is also a maladministration, which will injure the justice of the people, if these cases are handled using the Corruption Act.
Therefore, the Attorney General of the Republic of Indonesia urges that it be a shared reflection that law enforcement for criminal acts of corruption must also prioritize the value of substantive justice in addition to the benefits of law and legal certainty.
"Preventive assistance and guidance efforts" for the Village Head by the ranks of the Prosecutor's Office or the district/city inspectorate are very important and a priority. In addition, efforts to raise awareness to the perpetrators to voluntarily return state financial losses arising from their actions are mitigating matters if the return of state financial losses is carried out at the stage of investigation, prosecution or examination at trial.
The Prosecutor's Office appreciates that if the alleged perpetrator has returned voluntarily, when the inspectorate team has gone down and found state financial losses before the investigation is carried out by law enforcement officers, and the case is an administrative error and the state financial losses incurred are also relatively small. For this model case, the Attorney General of the Republic of Indonesia discussed in the form of an appeal to be handled using other instruments other than the instrument of the law on corruption.
The appeal of the Attorney General of the Republic of Indonesia is not for impunity for perpetrators of criminal acts of corruption with relatively small state financial losses, but the discourse is opened for discussion to the public so that the prosecution of criminal acts of corruption is based on clear thinking on the nature of law enforcement itself, namely restoration to its original state. .
Second, related to corruption cases with a state financial loss of less than Rp. 1,000,000 (one million rupiah), the case is not related to state financial losses, but is related to efforts to eradicate illegal levies (saber extortion). Therefore, the Attorney General of the Republic of Indonesia conveyed when he was in the DPR RI that the handling was expected to be carried out in a professional manner with due regard to conscience and/or using other instruments other than the Corruption Law.
Furthermore, the Attorney General of the Republic of Indonesia also conveyed that for cases of corruption related to state financial losses, the Attorney General's Office had given an appeal to his staff for corruption crimes whose state financial losses were below Rp. 50,000,000 (fifty million rupiah) to be resolved. by way of returning state financial losses as an effort to implement the legal process quickly, simply and at low cost.
Meanwhile, the view related to the analysis of the economic value in corruption crimes also needs to be the attention of law enforcement officers where it can be imagined that Rp 50,000,000 (fifty million rupiah) of corruption must be handled by law enforcement officers (from investigation to execution) with operational costs for handling cases issued by the State may exceed Rp. 50,000,000.- (fifty million rupiahs) of the resulting State losses, this will become a burden on the government such as the cost of eating, drinking and other facilities to the Defendant if the Defendant is processed up to execution ( in Correctional Institutions).
That is, the analysis of the costs and benefits of handling corruption cases is also important to be considered in order to achieve the value of community justice and the value of legal benefits.
The English, Chinese, Japanese, Arabic, and French versions are automatically generated by the AI. So there may still be inaccuracies in translating, please always see Indonesian as our main language. (system supported by DigitalSiber.id)
