<![CDATA[Corruption trials in Indonesia have long been viewed as both a test and a symbol of judicial integrity. In recent years, however, shifts in political dynamics and public sentiment have reshaped the way corruption cases are prosecuted and adjudicated. This study investigates the changing nature of corruption trials in Indonesia by examining recent high-profile cases, the role of the Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK), and the judiciary’s response under increased political scrutiny. Using case study analysis, media reviews, and legal documentation, the research explores how political influence and public pressure affect prosecutorial discretion, judicial decisions, and institutional accountability. The findings reveal a growing concern over selective enforcement, perceived leniency toward political elites, and the weakening of anti-corruption institutions. Public trust in judicial outcomes is increasingly contingent on transparency and the appearance of impartiality, yet courts often struggle to maintain credibility in politically charged contexts. The novelty of this study lies in its integrated analysis of legal processes, political pressure, and societal expectations. It argues that restoring public confidence in corruption trials requires not only institutional reform but also judicial courage and systemic insulation from partisan influence. The study contributes to comparative discussions on judicial accountability in transitional democracies.]]>
