<![CDATA[This study analyzes the normative conflict between Article 32 paragraph (1) of the Law on the Eradication of Corruption Crimes (UU PTPK), which permits Public Accounting Firms (KAPs) to calculate state financial losses, and Article 6 paragraph (4) of the Supreme Audit Agency Law (UU BPK), which mandates the submission of such audit reports to the BPK. The research focuses on the legal urgency of this submission obligation and evaluates the evidentiary weight of KAP reports unverified by the BPK through the lens of exclusionary rules. This study employs a normative juridical method, utilizing statutory, case, and conceptual approaches. The findings reveal two main points. First, state financial loss audit reports issued by Public Accountants must be submitted to the BPK, as mandated by Article 6 paragraph (4) of the UU BPK and the Supreme Court Circular Letter (SEMA) Number 2 of 2024. KAPs lack the constitutional attributive authority to declare state financial losses; such authority rests absolutely with the BPK as the final validator. Second, from the perspective of exclusionary rules, KAP reports that are neither submitted to nor verified by the BPK are classified as procedurally flawed (tainted/unlawful evidence). Consequently, these reports lose their absolute evidentiary weight as independent documentary evidence. Nevertheless, adhering to the principle of judicial independence and SEMA No. 2 of 2024, judges retain the discretion to dynamically assess state financial losses based on their conviction and the integration of other valid evidence presented during the trial.]]>
