Sahputra, Agis (2023) Analisis Pertanggungjawaban Penerapan Uang Pengganti Dalam Putusan Perkara Tindak Pidana Korupsi Nomor: 10/pid-sus-tpk/2018/pn.tpg. Masters thesis, Universitas Islam Riau.

Text 211021070.pdf - Submitted Version Restricted to Registered users only Download (3MB) | Request a copy

Abstract

The return of a state's financial or property loss is a consequence of a criminal act of corruption that could harm the state's finances or economy, so to recover the loss, a juridical means of additional punishment is required in the form of payment of replacement money. The purpose of a replacement money criminal is to convict as many as possible corruptors as possible, as well as to recover the state's finances lost by corruption, in which this effort provides the proceeds of the state treasury from the payment of the replacement money. The purpose of this study is am aware of the Application of Replacement Money in Efforts to Return State Loss in Corruption Crime Case Decision Number: 10/Pid-Sus-TPK/2018/PN.Tpg, and what is the basis for the consideration for the judge to apply the replacement money decision. The method used is the study of normative law through library studies/documentary studies. The type of approach used in this normative law study is the Statute Approach. The results of the study showed that the defendant could only be sentenced to an additional penalty if the property he obtained was the result of corruption as stipulated in Law No. 319 Jo. Act No. 20 of 2001. If there is a corruption crime together, then the judge can drop the amount of replacement money based on the property obtained by each defendant. Based on the legal facts revealed in the trial, the defendant Jasmin Bin Adil was not legally proven and convinced that he was guilty of committing a criminal act as alleged in Primair's indictment. Exempting the Defendant therefore from Primair's indictment. It states that Defendant has been legally proven and conclusively guilty of committing a criminal act of corruption together as in the sub-subsidiary documents. So the judge decided to punish the Defendant to pay a replacement money of Rp. 158,200,000.00 (total fifty-eight million two hundred thousand rupiahs).

Actions (login required)

View Item