<![CDATA[Law enforcement against corruption crimes must comply with existing laws and regulations. The corruption case involving the former Deputy Regent of Pasuruan for the 2013–2018 period illustrates differences in the legal process, particularly the disparity in verdicts between the first-instance court and the appellate court. This research focuses on: 1) The law enforcement process against the former Deputy Regent of Pasuruan 2013–2018, 2) The court rulings on the corruption crime, and 3) The Islamic legal perspective on the process and rulings of the case. The research method used is qualitative with an empirical approach. Data were obtained through observation, interviews, and documentation, then analyzed through the stages of data collection, reduction, presentation, and conclusion drawing, with data validity ensured through triangulation. The findings show: 1) The law enforcement process went through five stages, namely investigation, inquiry, prosecution, trial, and execution. The entire process was based on applicable regulations, and the actions of the Prosecutor’s Office were considered appropriate and in accordance with the law. 2) The legal rulings in this case show two different categories of verdicts. The disparity was influenced by the prevailing legal system, judges’ interpretations of the law, and their schools of thought. 3) From the perspective of Islamic law, the law enforcement process aligns with the principles of sharia. Meanwhile, the court ruling on this corruption case, when viewed through Islamic law, falls under the category of ta’zir, a type of punishment determined by the ruler or judge based on policy. Thus, this case demonstrates how positive law and Islamic law share common ground in law enforcement principles, despite differences in the rulings.
Penegakan hukum terhadap tindak pidana korupsi harus mematuhi peraturan perundang-undangan yang berlaku. Kasus korupsi yang melibatkan mantan Wakil Bupati Pasuruan periode 2013–2018 menggambarkan adanya perbedaan dalam proses hukum, khususnya disparitas putusan antara pengadilan tingkat pertama dan pengadilan tingkat banding. Penelitian ini berfokus pada: 1) Proses penegakan hukum terhadap mantan Wakil Bupati Pasuruan periode 2013–2018, 2) Putusan pengadilan terkait tindak pidana korupsi tersebut, dan 3) Perspektif hukum Islam terhadap proses serta putusan kasus tersebut. Metode penelitian yang digunakan adalah kualitatif dengan pendekatan empiris. Data diperoleh melalui observasi, wawancara, dan dokumentasi, kemudian dianalisis melalui tahapan pengumpulan, reduksi, penyajian, dan penarikan kesimpulan data, dengan validitas data yang dipastikan melalui triangulasi. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan: 1) Proses penegakan hukum melalui lima tahapan, yaitu penyelidikan, penyidikan, penuntutan, persidangan, dan eksekusi. Seluruh proses didasarkan pada peraturan yang berlaku, dan tindakan Kejaksaan dinilai tepat serta sesuai dengan hukum. 2) Putusan hukum dalam kasus ini menunjukkan dua kategori putusan yang berbeda. Disparitas tersebut dipengaruhi oleh sistem hukum yang berlaku, interpretasi hakim terhadap hukum, serta aliran pemikiran hukum yang dianut hakim. 3) Dari perspektif hukum Islam, proses penegakan hukum tersebut selaras dengan prinsip-prinsip syariah. Sementara itu, putusan pengadilan atas kasus korupsi ini, jika ditinjau dari hukum Islam, termasuk dalam kategori *ta’zir*, yaitu jenis hukuman yang ditetapkan oleh penguasa atau hakim berdasarkan kebijakan. Dengan demikian, kasus ini menunjukkan bagaimana hukum positif dan hukum Islam memiliki kesamaan dalam prinsip penegakan hukum, meskipun terdapat perbedaan dalam putusan yang dihasilkan.]]>
