Burden of Proof Reverse as A Solution to Eradicate Bribery in Criminal Acts of Corruption

Authors

  • Dian Adriawan Daeng Tawang Faculty of Law, Universitas Trisakti, Jakarta, Indonesia
  • Rini Purwaningsih Faculty of Law, Universitas Trisakti, Jakarta, Indonesia

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.46799/ijssr.v2i9.160

Keywords:

Burden of Proof Reverse, Bribery, Corruption

Abstract

The assumption that corruption is seen as an extraordinary crime (extraordinaru crime) and transnational and cross-border crimes causes that in terms of eradicating it needs to be carried out in an extraordinary manner (extra ordinary counter measure). There is a stereotype in the community regarding gratification and bribery, it is difficult to prove it, so it is necessary to apply an exception (enforcement exceptionality) through the application of reversing the burden of proof which will make it difficult for the public prosecutor to escape from the snares of the law. The research’s purpose of implementing the method of reversing the burden of proof in addition to making it easier for public prosecutors to ensnare perpetrators of gratification and bribery is to minimize the occurrence of criminal acts of corruption. It is hoped that the results of this research will be able to contribute ideas and suggestions for the development of legal science, especially those related to criminal procedural law. It is also hoped that this research will become part of the library information media that provides benefits to sharpen the quality in making further research on formal criminal law. This normative research is supported by primary data, in addition to using secondary data which is a literature study in the form of laws and regulations. There is a stipulation of the method of reversing the burden of proof, shifting the burden of proof from the public prosecutor to the defendant.

References

Alfitra, S. H. (2014). Modus Operandi Pidana Khusus di Luar KUHP: korupsi, money laundering, & trafficking. Raih Asa Sukses. Google Scholar

Ali, M. Z. (2016). Kebijakan Kriminal. Jakarta: Sinar Grafika. Google Scholar

Heard, B. P., Brook, B. W., Wigley, T. M., & Bradshaw, C. J. (2017). Burden of proof: A comprehensive review of the feasibility of 100% renewable-electricity systems. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 76, 1122-1133 Scopus

Hiariej, E. O. S. (2013). Teori dan Hukum Pembuktian. Google Scholar

Nurhayati, Y., Ifrani, I., & Said, M. Y. (2021). Metodologi Normatif Dan Empiris Dalam Perspektif Ilmu Hukum. Jurnal Penegakan Hukum Indonesia, 2(1), 1–20. Google Scholar

Prodjohamidjojo, M. (2000). Penerapan Pembuktian Terbalik Dalam Delik Korupsi (UU No. 31 Tahun 1999). Google Scholar

Rahim, A., & Mokobombang, M. (2020). Analisis Penerapan Pembuktian Terbalik dalam Kasus Tindak Pidana Korupsi:(Studi Perkara Nomor: 22/Pid. Sus-TPK/2018/PN. Gto). Al-Mizan, 16(2), 225–248. Google Scholar

Rahmad, R. A. (2019). Hukum Acara Pidana. Jakarta: Rajawali Pers. Google Scholar

Samosir, A. (2017). Pembuktian Terbalik: suatu Kajian Teoretis terhadap Tindak Pidana Korupsi. PROGRESIF: Jurnal Hukum, 11(1). Google Scholar

Soekanto, S. (2014). Faktor-faktor yang mempengaruhi penegakan hukum. Google Scholar

Suyatno, K. (2005). Kolusi, dan Nepotisme. Pustaka Sinar Harapan, Jakarta. Google Scholar

Downloads

Published

2022-09-26