The Effectiveness of Investigations and Prosecutions of Corruption Crimes by the Corruption Eradication Commission, the Police, and the Prosecutor's Office: A Study of the Power of Power in Criminal Law Enforcement
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.46799/ijssr.v6i5.1403Keywords:
effectiveness, investigation, inquiry, corruption, KPK, PoliceAbstract
This research analyzes the effectiveness of investigations and prosecutions of corruption crimes conducted by the Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK), the Indonesian National Police, and the Indonesian Attorney General’s Office, focusing on the dynamics of authority disputes within the national law enforcement system. The multiplicity of law enforcement agencies authorized to investigate corruption has created institutional complexity, disharmony of authority, and potential inter-institutional competition that affect the effectiveness of the case-handling process. This research uses a comparative legal system approach by comparing Indonesia’s multi-agency model with jurisdictions that adopt a single-agency model with exclusive authority in eradicating corruption. The research results show that the effectiveness of investigations and prosecutions conducted by the Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK) is relatively high due to strong regulatory support, independence, and institutional focus on corruption. In contrast, the Police and the Prosecutor’s Office face structural constraints, extensive caseloads, and limited coordination, which affect the quality of case handling. Authority disputes among institutions often give rise to overlapping processes, delays in case handling, and legal uncertainty in determining the most competent institution. Comparisons with other national legal systems show that countries implementing a single-agency model, such as the Corrupt Practices Investigation Bureau (CPIB) in Singapore and the Independent Commission Against Corruption (ICAC) in Hong Kong, are more effective in handling corruption due to clear authority, minimal jurisdictional conflict, and a rapid investigation process. This research concludes that the effectiveness of investigation and prosecution mechanisms in Indonesia needs to be strengthened through the reconstruction of authority design, the strengthening of systemic coordination, and the establishment of clearer jurisdictional boundaries among law enforcement institutions.
References
Amable, B. (2016). Institutional complementarities in the dynamic comparative analysis of capitalism. Journal of Institutional Economics, 12(1), 79–103.
Anwary, I. (2022). Evaluation of the effectiveness of public administration policies in the development of stringent legal framework: An analysis of the criminal justice system in Indonesia. International Journal of Criminal Justice Sciences, 17(2), 312–323.
Asis, A. (2024). The legal position of the KPK as an independent anti-corruption agency in Indonesia: A review in Law No. 19 of 2019 and UNCAC. Unnes Law Journal, 10(1), 81–100.
Ayu, R. F., Albab, M. U., Yakin, M. A., & Hibbatulloh, I. (2025). Legal challenges in countering religion-based terrorism in Asia. Jurnal Lentera Insani, 1–15.
Diar, A., Munandar, T. I., & Abd Aziz, S. N. (2025). A comparative analysis of the transformation of corruption practices in Indonesia and Malaysia. Indonesian Journal of Criminal Law Studies, 10(2), 851–900.
Gray, B., Purdy, J. M., & Ansari, S. (2015). From interactions to institutions: Microprocesses of framing and mechanisms for the structuring of institutional fields. Academy of Management Review, 40(1), 115–143.
Hendarman Supandji. (2008, September 4). Kebijakan dan strategi pemberantasan tindak pidana korupsi [Kuliah umum]. Universitas Diponegoro.
Hutabarat, C., Abra, E. H., & Hadiyanto, A. (2025). State responsibility towards the rights of customary communities on Rempang Island from the perspective of state administrative law (HTN). Journal of Law, Politic and Humanities, 6(1), 698–710.
Jonas Frödin, O. (2024). Cognitive microfoundations and social interaction dynamics: The implications of complexity for institutional theory. Theory and Society, 53(5), 1019–1047.
Karyonol, H. (2026). Coordinating role of state institutions in addressing forest degradation in Indonesia following the rise in. In Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Social Environment Diversity (ICOSEND 2025) (p. 138).
Kwon, J. (2024). Jurisdictional overlap: The juxtaposition of institutional independence and collaboration in police wrongdoing investigations. Regulation & Governance, 18(2), 551–572.
Nazarko, A. (2023). Legal tug-of-war: The institutional challenges of the domestic prosecution of war crimes in Ukraine.
OECD. (2020). International experiences with anti-corruption agencies. OECD Publishing.
Prevention of Bribery Ordinance (Cap. 201). (Hong Kong).
Prissandi, G., Wiranto, S., Said, B. D., Widodo, P., Saragih, H. J. R., & Suwarno, P. (2023). Reformulation of regulations in the context of structuring the Indonesian maritime security regime. International Journal of Humanities Education and Social Sciences, 2(6), 1969–1983.
Rubin, E. L., & Feeley, M. M. (2021). Criminal justice through management: From police, prosecutors, courts, and prisons to a modern administrative agency. Oregon Law Review, 100, 261.
Salim, A., Suryati, S., & Yusoh, R. (2025). Law enforcement against corruption in Indonesia: Between expectation and reality. Realism: Law Review, 3(2), 12–30.
Sangesti, D. G. (2025). Legal system transformation as a foundation for an inclusive and sustainable future in law enforcement that is responsive to global and local challenges. Jurnal Locus Delicti, 6(2), 111–119.
Simatupang, M. W. (2025). The independence of the Corruption Eradication Commission after the revision of Law No. 19 of 2019: The perspective of the theory of separation of powers and its implications. Journal of Legal Contemplation, 1(2), 60–70.
Suadi, A. (2021). Law enforcement against corruption in the criminal justice system in Indonesia. Annals of the Romanian Society for Cell Biology, 25(6), 4586–4591.
Susilo, E. W. (2023). The battle against corruption in Indonesia’s municipalities: A guide to diagnosis, strategy, and implementation.
UNODC. (2014). Specialized anti-corruption agencies: A comparative study.
Zaini, A., & Ridho, M. Z. (2023). The auxiliary state organ authorities in Indonesia: The constitutional implications of Law No. 19 of 2019 concerning KPK. Potret Pemikiran, 27(2), 185–200.
Zuwanda, Z. S., Lubis, A. F., Solapari, N., Sakmaf, M. S., & Triyantoro, A. (2024). Ethical and legal analysis of artificial intelligence systems in law enforcement with a study of potential human rights violations in Indonesia. The Easta Journal Law and Human Rights, 2(03), 176–185.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Rusdi Rusdi, Evita Isretno Israhadi
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International. that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work.
