Akbar, Ilham Nurul (2025) Analisis Yuridis Pembuktian Tindak Pidana Pencucian Uang yang Dilakukan oleh Pegawai Negeri Sipil Dalam Perkara Nomor 151/PID.SUS/2022/PN PBR. Other thesis, Universitas Islam Riau.

Text skripsi_181010687_watermark.pdf - Submitted Version Restricted to Registered users only Download (846kB) | Request a copy

Abstract

The Case of Decision 151/Pid.Sus/2022/PN Pbr highlights the problem of the correct application of the article; the defendant took active action (for example, exchanging foreign currency), which is more in accordance with Article 3 of the TPPU Law, not Article 5 paragraph (1) (passive action). This inaccuracy prompted the study to analyze the legal evidence and the basis for the judge's considerations in the TPPU in question The formulation of the problem in this study, First, how is the Process of Proving Money Laundering Crimes Committed by Civil Servants in Case Number 151/Pid.Sus/2022/PN Pbr. Second, What is the Basis for the Judge's Consideration of Proving the Crime of Money Laundering Committed by Civil Servants in Case Number 151/Pid.Sus/2022/PN Pbr? The method used by the author in this study is the Normative legal research method, namely library legal research is a method or method used in legal research which is carried out by examining existing library materials and connecting them with the decision of the Pekanbaru District Court judge who decided Decision 151/Pid.Sus/2022/PN Pbr While the nature of this research is descriptive, namely the author tries to provide a detailed description. Namely describing the problems found to be interrelated in a relevant and logical and legal manner to find out a clear and detailed picture of the case of Decision 151/Pid.Sus/2022/PN Pbr Evidence in Decision 151/Pid.Sus/2022/PN Pbr, Agus Mulia, a civil servant at Class IIA Bengkalis Prison, was charged with TPPU for narcotics crimes. Evidence using witnesses (BNN, prisoners, family, bank), experts, documents (accounts, assets, transactions), and clues. The defendant admitted several facts, but denied being involved in drugs and claimed money from legal businesses. Consideration of the Panel of Judges The verdict sentenced Agus Mulia based on Article 5 paragraph (1) of the TPPU Law for lending accounts and drug money transactions. He was imprisoned for 1 year and 4 months, fined IDR 100 million, and confiscated evidence. The analysis shows that Article 3 of the TPPU Law should be applied because he actively disguised the origin of the money, including exchanging foreign currency and buying assets in the name of others.

Actions (login required)

View Item