Rahayu Pulungan, Astuty (2025) Pelaksanaan Eksekusi Terhadap Barang Bukti Tindak Pidana Korupsi Berdasarkan Putusan Nomor : 61/pid.sus-tpk/2024/pn.pbr Diluar Wilayah Hukum Kejaksaan Negeri Pekanbaru. Masters thesis, Universitas Islam Riau.

Text 211022151.pdf Restricted to Registered users only Download (2MB) | Request a copy

Abstract

Execution of evidence in corruption cases is a part of the law enforcement process aimed at ensuring that the assets derived from crimes are returned to the state or rightful parties. However, the execution process often faces obstacles, especially when the evidence is located outside the jurisdiction of the Prosecutor's Office handling the case. The research question addressed in this study is: How is the Execution and Barriers to the Execution of Evidence in Corruption Cases Based on Verdict Number: 61/Pid.Sus-TPK/2024/PN.Pbr Outside the Jurisdiction of the Pekanbaru District Prosecutor’s Office? This study is classified as sociological or empirical legal research. In terms of its methodology, this research is categorized as observational research, utilizing interviews as the primary data collection method. The research findings show that the execution of evidence in corruption cases, especially when the evidence is located outside the jurisdiction of the Pekanbaru District Prosecutor’s Office, as in the case of Verdict Number: 61/Pid.Sus-TPK/2024/PN.Pbr, is a highly complex process requiring careful handling and coordination among different legal institutions. In this case, the seized evidence includes a bank account with funds amounting to Rp 3 billion in Surabaya and land and buildings in Bandung, both of which need to be executed despite being outside the jurisdiction of the Pekanbaru District Prosecutor’s Office. Based on the findings, it can be concluded that the execution of evidence in this case requires several key steps, including intensive coordination between the Pekanbaru District Prosecutor’s Office and the local Prosecutor’s Offices in the regions where the evidence is located. Furthermore, the administrative process involving various related institutions, such as the bank, the National Land Agency (BPN), and other relevant bodies, plays a crucial role in ensuring the smooth execution of evidence. Various obstacles were identified, such as complex coordination between different District Prosecutor’s Offices, procedural differences among related institutions, administrative barriers, evidence security concerns, and potential legal disputes from the convict or third parties. To overcome these obstacles, there is a need for enhanced coordination between institutions, simplification of administrative procedures, strengthening of evidence security, and the capacity-building of prosecutors in handling cross-jurisdictional executions.

Actions (login required)

View Item