Pertanggung Jawaban Pidana Dalam Tindak Pidana Korupsi Yang Dilakukan Oleh Hakim

  • Ahmad Yunus Universitas Ibrahimy
  • Moh. Jeweherul Kalamiah STIS Nurul Qornain
Keywords: Criminal Responsibility, Corruption, Judge

Abstract

Judges are often referred to as God's representatives in the world, this is because of the extraordinary role of judges in overseeing the law and upholding justice, including in eradicating criminal acts of corruption. As time goes by, the disease of corruption has not only infected ordinary officials, but even officials tasked with law enforcement, in this case judges, have also been caught in cases of criminal acts of corruption. Of course, this is not a trivial problem, where a judge who is supposed to uphold legal norms in order to achieve justice and peace in society, instead commits a criminal act of corruption. The criminal act of corruption is a criminal act that falls into the category of extra ordinary crime, this is because the impact of this criminal act of corruption is very large and systematic. Therefore, the state, in this case represented by the government, must make special breakthroughs in responding to judges who commit criminal acts of corruption, of course one of which is by using criminal law instruments which contain penalties. The punishment of criminals whose status is an ordinary person should not be equated with those whose status is a state official, in this case a judge. In this legal matter, the state must really show its teeth to prove to the public that law enforcement in Indonesia is not only sharp downwards but also sharp upwards. In this research the author will discuss criminal responsibility in criminal acts of corruption committed by judges. 

References

BUKU

Anugerah. Prasetyo, Teguh, (2011). Hukum Pidana. Jakarta: Rajawali Pers. Prints,

Arif Pribadi, Muhammad dkk. Tanpa Tahun. Eksistensi Pidana Mati Dalam Tindak Pidana Korupsi Terkait Pembaharuan Hukum Pidana Di Indonesia. Makalah. Malang: Fakultas Hukum Universitas Brawijaya

Asikin, Zainal dan Amiruddin. (2012). Metode Penelitian Hukum. Jakarta: Rajawali Pers.

Asshiddiqie, Jimly. (2008). Hukum Tata Negara Darurat. Jakarta: Rajawali Pers.

---------, Pengantar Ilmu Hukum Tata Negara. Jakarta: Rajawali Pers, 2010.

Darwan. (2002). Pemberantasan Tindak Pidana Korupsi. Bandung: PT. Citra Aditya Bakti.

Djatmiko, Purwo, (2012). Kamus Lengkap Bahasa Indonesia. Surabaya:

Nugraheny, Dian Erika. (2018 Agustus 20). Tiga Syarat Penetapan Status Bencana Nasional. https://republika.co.id/berita/nasional/politik/18/08/20/pdrkbt430-tiga-syarat-penetapan-status-bencana-nasional. 20 Agustus 2018, Diakses tanggal 25 Juni 2021.

Puluhulawa, F. U., Puluhulawa, J., & Katili, M. G. (2020). Legal Weak Protection of Personal Data in the 4.0 Industrial Revolution Era. Jambura Law Review, 2(2).

Redaksi Sinar Grafika, (2013). KUHAP dan KUHP. Jakarta: Sinar Grafika.

PERATURAN PERUNDANG-UNDANGAN

- UUD NEGARA REPUBLIK INDONESIA TAHUN 1945

- Undang-Undang tentang Pemberantasan Tindak Pidana Korupsi No. 31 Tahun 1999

- UU NOMOR 20 TAHUN 2001 TENTANG PERUBAHAN ATAS UNDANG-UNDANG NOMOR 31 TAHUN 1999 TENTANG PEMBERANTASAN TINDAK PIDANA KORUPSI.

INTERNET

- https://news.detik.com/berita/d-7084855/jokowi-ungkap-jumlah-pejabat-korup-2004-2022-dari-menteri-hingga-eks-ketua-dpr

- https://www.hukumonline.com/berita/a/menakar-sanksi-berat-pengadil-bila-terbukti-korupsi-lt63f9a50d1fa35/

Published
2023-11-30
How to Cite
Ahmad Yunus, & Moh. Jeweherul Kalamiah. (2023). Pertanggung Jawaban Pidana Dalam Tindak Pidana Korupsi Yang Dilakukan Oleh Hakim. Hakim: Jurnal Ilmu Hukum Dan Sosial, 1(4), 341-355. https://doi.org/10.51903/hakim.v1i4.1711