Penanggulangan Tindak Pidana Korupsi Oleh Korporasi Dengan Konsep Deferred Prosecution Agreement
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.22225/kw.19.2.2025.142-150Keywords:
Criminal acts of corruption, corporations, the concept of deferred prosecution agreementsAbstract
The objectives of combating corruption as stipulated in UNCAC 2003 are to effectively and efficiently eradicate corruption, recover assets, and build international cooperation. None of the objectives are to punish perpetrators as severely as possible. The concept of deferred prosecution agreements is marked by a shift in the principle of combating corruption from primum remedium to ultimum remedium. Based on the background described above, several issues can be formulated as follows: 1) How are corporate corruption crimes regulated in UNCAC 2003 and Indonesian positive law? 2) How does the concept of deferred prosecution agreements serve as an effort to combat corporate corruption crimes? The type of research used in this study is normative legal research. The technique of legal material analysis applied in this study is legal interpretation. The results of this study show that the regulation of corporate corruption in UNCAC 2003 and Indonesian positive law can be seen in several provisions of UNCAC 2003, namely: Article 12 paragraph (2) letter c; Article 14 paragraph (1); Article 26; Article 46 paragraph (2); Article 51; Article 52 paragraph (2). Specifically regarding the regulation of corporate liability in Article 26 of UNCAC 2003, compared to the provisions in Article 1 number 3, Article 18 and Article 20 of the PTPK Law. The formulative policy of deferred prosecution agreements in criminal acts of corruption committed by corporations in the future (ius constituendum) with the concept of deferred prosecution agreements that can be accommodated for application in Indonesia must refer to the Indonesian legal culture based on the noble values of Pancasila and adhere to the trilogy of judicial principles: simplicity, speed, and low cost.
References
Alatas, S. H. (1987). Korupsi, sifat, sebab dan fungsi. Jakarta: LP3ES.
Amiruddin, & Asikin, Z. (2013). Pengantar metode penelitian hukum. Bandung: Citra Aditiya.
Atmasasmita, R. (2016). Hukum kejahatan bisnis: Teori dan praktik di era globalisasi (Edisi pertama, Cet. ke-2). Jakarta: Kencana.
Danil, E. (2014). Korupsi: Konsep, tindak pidana, dan pemberantasannya (Cet. ke-3). Jakarta: RajaGrafindo Persada.
Hamzah, A. (2007). Pemberantasan korupsi melalui hukum pidana nasional dan internasional (Edisi Revisi). Jakarta: RajaGrafindo Persada.
Hiariej, E. O. S. (2012). Pembuktian terbalik dalam pengembalian aset kejahatan korupsi [Pidato Pengukuhan Guru Besar]. Fakultas Hukum Universitas Gadjah Mada.
Hutauruk, R. H. (2013). Penanggulangan kejahatan korporasi melalui pendekatan restoratif: Suatu terobosan hukum. Jakarta: Sinar Grafika.
Iqbal. A. (2020). Penerapan deferred prosecution agreement di Indonesia sebagai alternatif penyelesaian tindak pidana ekonomi yang dilakukan oleh korporasi. Jurnal Yuridis, 7(1).
Kristian. (2018). Kebijakan eksekusi: Sistem pertanggungjawaban pidana korporasi dalam berbagai putusan pengadilan di Indonesia. Jakarta: Sinar Grafika.
Muladi, & Priyatno, D. (1991). Pertanggungjawaban korporasi dalam hukum pidana. Bandung: Sekolah Tinggi Hukum Bandung (STHB).
Mulyadi, L. (2020). Model ideal pengembalian aset (asset recovery) pelaku tindak pidana korupsi. Jakarta: Kencana.
Nelson, F. M. (2020). Pengembalian kerugian keuangan negara: Dapatkah menggunakan deferred prosecution agreement? Palembang: Fakultas Hukum Universitas Sriwijaya.
Nelson, F. M. (2020). Plea bargaining & deferred prosecution agreement dalam tindak pidana korupsi. Jakarta: Sinar Grafika.
Priyatno, D., & Kristian. (2017). Kebijakan formulasi sistem pertanggungjawaban pidana korporasi dalam peraturan perundang-undangan khusus di luar KUHP di Indonesia. Jakarta: Sinar Grafika.
Santiawan, I. M., & Swardhana, G. M. (2021). Konsep deferred prosecution agreement (DPA) dalam sistem peradilan pidana di Indonesia. Jurnal Kertha Semaya, 9(6).
Sjawie, H. F. (2013). Direksi perseroan terbatas serta pertanggungjawaban pidana korporasi. Bandung: Citra Aditya Bakti.
Sjahdeni, S. R. (2014). Perbankan syariah: Produk-produk dan aspek-aspek hukumnya. Jakarta: Kencana.
Suhariyanto, B. (2016). Progresivitas putusan pemidanaan terhadap korporasi pelaku tindak pidana korupsi. Jurnal De Jure, 16(2).
Sumedana, K. (2020). Mediasi penal dalam sistem peradilan berbasis nilai-nilai Pancasila. Yogyakarta: Genta Publishing.
Wahid, A. (2022). Keadilan restoratif: Upaya menemukan keadilan substantif? Jurnal Ius Constituendum, 7(2).
Widjajanti, E., & Candra, S. (2016). Pemikiran Romli Atmasasmita “tentang pemberantasan korupsi di Indonesia”. Jakarta: Kencana.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 I Nengah Nuarta, Mochamad Sukedi

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
This journal provides immediate open access to its content on the principle that making research freely available to the public supports a greater global exchange of knowledge.
All articles published Open Access will be immediately and permanently free for everyone to read and download. We are continuously working with our author communities to select the best choice of license options, currently being defined for this journal as follows: Creative Commons-Non Ceomercial-Attribution-ShareAlike (CC BY-NC-SA)




