Legal Literacy - President Prabowo's speech in Egypt sparked controversy regarding the discourse on forgiving corruptors on the condition of returning state assets. This article reviews the legal and ethical aspects, its impact on law enforcement, and policy solutions. Corruption Eradication in Indonesia.
Controversy of President Prabowo's Statement
President Prabowo Subianto's speech in front of Indonesian students in Cairo, Egypt, on Wednesday, December 18, sparked controversy and fierce debate, drawing various harsh criticisms from the public and legal academics. The author quotes two main points from the President's speech: "I am in the context of giving what is called giving voor, what is voor, what is it, giving a chance, giving a chance to repent." He continued, "Hey, corruptors or those who feel they have stolen from the people, if you return what you stole, maybe we will forgive you, but return it," the author highlights these two statements from the President for review in this article to avoid broadening the discussion and interpretation.
In legal review, the concept of forgiveness is often associated with clemency, amnesty, abolition, or rehabilitation as regulated in the Constitution and the Criminal Code (KUHP). However, its application to perpetrators of corruption raises ethical and legal dilemmas regarding the impact on deterrence, the rights of victims, and public perception of the integrity of law enforcement. This article aims to critically examine the legality and relevance of forgiveness policies for corruptors within the framework of Indonesian law. In addition, this paper also highlights the social and political implications that may arise from this policy, as well as alternative solutions that can be taken to maintain a balance between justice and state asset recovery policies.
To understand the polemic view on the return of proceeds from corruption crimes to the state, we need to look at three main aspects: First, the legal political history of corruption eradication since Indonesia's independence. Second, the development of international corruption eradication regulations. Third, the urgency of current and future Indonesian regulations.
Before discussing further, the author would like to emphasize that we should not rush to judge President Prabowo's statement. Nor should we immediately label it as an attitude that opposes corruption eradication, or conversely, praise it excessively. Currently, there are actually 30 forms of corruption recognized under the Corruption Crime Act (Tipikor). If categorized further, these criminal acts can be grouped into seven main categories.
Firstly, corruption that causes state financial losses, which is regulated in two articles. Secondly, corruption related to bribery, which is regulated in 12 articles. Thirdly, corruption involving embezzlement in office, which is regulated in five articles. Fourthly, corruption related to extortion, which is regulated in three articles. Fifthly, corruption in the form of fraudulent acts, which is regulated in six articles. Sixthly, corruption related to the procurement of goods and services, which is regulated in one article. Seventhly, corruption related to gratification, which is regulated in one article. Thus, corruption is not only about enriching oneself, others, or legal entities, but also involves abuse of authority and losses to state finances.[1]
Comments (0)
Write a comment