ANALISA YURIDIS ARTICLE 54 PARAGRAPH (1) C UNITED NATION CONVENTION AGAINST CORRUPTION TENTANG PERAMPASAN ASET TANPA PEMIDANAAN TERIKAIT TINDAK PIDANA KORUPSI DALAM SISTEM HUKUM PIDANA YANG BERLAKU DI INDONESIA
| Main Author: | Astuti, Yurliza Ikhwana; Fakultas Hukum Universitas Brawijaya |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article eJournal |
| Bahasa: | ind |
| Terbitan: |
Kumpulan Jurnal Mahasiswa Fakultas Hukum
, 2017
|
| Online Access: |
http://hukum.studentjournal.ub.ac.id/index.php/hukum/article/view/2408 |
Daftar Isi:
- Yurliza Ikhwana Astuti, Dr. Prija Djatmika, S.H.,M.H., Ardi Ferdian, S.H.,M.,Kn. Fakultas Hukum Universitas Brawijaya Email: yurlizaikhwana04@gmail.com Abstrak Penelitian ini membahas dan menganalisis secara yuridis tentang article 54 paragraph (1) c dalam United Nation Convention Against Corruption 2003, mengenai Perampasan Aset Tanpa Pemidanaan dalam rangka melawan serta memberantas tindak pidana korupsi yang merupakan kejahatan dengan motif ekonomi, yang dari hari ke hari makin banyak ragam serta motif didalamnya. Dimana Indonesia telah meratifikasi dengan adanya Undang-Undang No. 7 Tahun 2006 tentang Pengesahan United Nation Convention Against Corruption 2003. Namun, walaupun Indonesia telah meratifikasi Konvensi PBB tahun 2003 ini selama lebih kurang 8 tahun, belum adanya peraturan khusus terkait Perampasan Aset Tanpa Pemidanaan. Masih saja dalam Naskah Rancangan Undang-Undang dari tahun 2012. Berdasarkan hal tersebut masalah yang dirumuskan adalah, apa implikasi yuridis (akibat hukum) dengan berlakunya article 54 paragraph (1) c United Nation Convention Against Corruption 2003 dalam sistem hukum pidana di Indonesia; serta bagaimana perbandingan hukum dengan sistem hukum pidana negara lain yang sudah memberlakukan perampasan aset tanpa pemidanaan di negaranya. Hasil dari penelitian ini menunjukkan bahwasanya Indonesia sebagai Negara Pihak yang telah meratifikasi United Nation Convention Against Corruption 2003 sudah seharusnya menerapkan prisip good faith, dengan melakukan penerapan dari isi/substansi United Nation Convention Against Corruption 2003. Serta, dengan adanya perbandingan antar negara yang telah memiliki peraturan khusus terkait berlakunya article 54 paragraph (1) c United Nation Convention Against Corruption 2003, terlihat bahwa Indonesia memiliki regulasi yang tidak memperlihatkan pentingnya dari penjatuhan pidana terkait Perampasan Aset Tanpa Pemidanaan dan kerugian negara yang dialami dari suatu tindak pidana korupsi belum dapat dikembalikan dengan baik. ABSTRACT JURIDICAL ANALYSIS ON ARTICLE 54 PARAGRAPH (1) C OF UNITED NATION CONVENTION AGAINTS CORRUPTION ON THE NON-CONVICTION BASED ASSET FORFEITURE APPLICABLE IN INDONESIA YurlizaIkhwanaAstuti, Dr. PrijaDjatmika, S.H.,M.H., ArdiFerdian, S.H.,M.,Kn. Faculty of LawUniversitasBrawijaya Email: yurlizaikhwana04@gmail.com Abstract This research juridically discussed and analyzed article 54 paragraph (1) c of United Nation Convention Against Corruption 2003, on the non-conviction based asset forfeiture in order to fight against and eradicate corruption which is a crime with the motive of economy with other more new motives. Indonesia has been ratified Law number 7 year 2006 on the ratification of United Nation Convention against Corruption 2003. Although Indonesia has ratified the United Nation Convention year 2003 for around 8 years, it does not have specific regulation concerning non-conviction based asset forfeiture as it is only contained in drafts of Bill from 2012. Therefore, the research problems formulated were what is the juridical implcation resulted from the enactment ofarticle 54 paragraph (1) c United Nation Convention Against Corruption 2003 in crime legal system in Indonesia; and how is the law applied in Indonesia compared to that of the law in other states appliying the non-conviction based asset forfeiture. The results of the study show that Indonesia as the state ratifying the United Nation Convention against Corruption 2003 is supposed to apply the principle of good faith by implementing the substance of the United Nation Convention against Corruption 2003. Besides, the compared to the states which have special regulation related to the enactment of article 54 paragraph (1) c United Nation Convention against Corruption 2003 indicates that Indonesia does not have regulation that emphasize the importance of sanction related to the non-conviction based asset forfeiture and the loss suffered by the state due to corruption has not been restored well.