Claim Missing Document
Check
Articles

Found 2 Documents
Search
Journal : referendum

Analisis Unsur Kerugian Keuangan Negara dalam Perkara Pembiayaan Kredit Usaha Rakyat Sistem Bayar Panen : Studi Kasus Putusan Nomor 41/Pid.Sus.TPK/2024/PN. MTR Roli Pebrianto; Noviana Noviana; Muhammad Panji Prabu Dharma; Syarif Dahlan
Referendum : Jurnal Hukum Perdata dan Pidana Vol. 2 No. 4 (2025): Desember : Referendum : Jurnal Hukum Perdata dan Pidana
Publisher : Asosiasi Peneliti dan Pengajar Ilmu Hukum Indonesia

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.62383/referendum.v2i4.1442

Abstract

This study seeks to examine how the element of state financial loss is applied in corruption cases that originate from private-law relationships, specifically in the context of Micro People’s Business Credit (KUR) financing using the Yarnen Porang scheme, as reflected in Decision Number 41/Pid.Sus.TPK/PN.MTR. The central issue addressed is the manner in which the panel of judges construed and affirmed the existence of a state financial loss that, in substance, arose from a civil act, namely the performance of a financing cooperation agreement between a banking institution and an offtaker. By employing a normative juridical approach and conducting an in-depth analysis of the judicial decision, this research concludes that the alleged state financial loss in the a quo case remains merely prospective in nature and does not satisfy the requirement of an actual and definite loss as mandated by positive law. Furthermore, evidence demonstrating that the financing funds were enjoyed by a third party rather than by the accused indicates a misapplication in attributing criminal liability. Consequently, the criminal prosecution of conduct that is essentially civil in character reflects an expansive interpretation of the state loss element, which is inconsistent with the principle of legality and the doctrine of prudence in the enforcement of corruption laws.
Eksistensi Asas Non Self-Incrimination dalam Praktik Plea Bargaining : Studi Komparatif dan Implikasinya dalam Sistem Peradilan Pidana Indonesia Roli Pebrianto; Noviana Noviana; Muhamad Panji Prabu Dharma
Referendum : Jurnal Hukum Perdata dan Pidana Vol. 3 No. 2 (2026): Juni : Referendum : Jurnal Hukum Perdata dan Pidana
Publisher : Asosiasi Peneliti dan Pengajar Ilmu Hukum Indonesia

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.62383/referendum.v3i2.1667

Abstract

The development of modern criminal justice systems demonstrates a growing tendency to prioritize efficiency through expedited case resolution mechanisms, one of which is plea bargaining. This mechanism is increasingly utilized in various legal systems as an alternative approach to reducing case backlogs, accelerating judicial processes, and minimizing litigation costs. On the other hand, criminal procedural law guarantees the defendant’s right to remain silent as an essential component of the principle of non self-incrimination, namely the right not to be compelled to admit guilt or provide evidence against oneself. This study aims to analyze whether the practice of plea bargaining has the potential to undermine this fundamental principle and affect the protection of defendants’ rights within criminal proceedings. The research employs a normative juridical method using statutory, conceptual, and comparative approaches. Legal materials were analyzed to examine the relationship between plea bargaining mechanisms and the protection of procedural rights in criminal justice systems. The findings indicate that plea bargaining inherently contains implicit pressure on defendants to admit guilt in exchange for reduced sentences, lighter charges, or procedural advantages. Such conditions may create an imbalance between procedural efficiency and the protection of fundamental rights, potentially weakening the defendant’s freedom to exercise the right to remain silent. Therefore, careful legal safeguards are necessary to ensure that efficiency-oriented mechanisms do not compromise the principles of fairness, due process, and the protection of human rights in criminal proceedings.