Article Per Year (5 Year)
p-Index From 2021 - 2026
0.408
P-Index
This Author published in this journals
All Journal Ipso Jure Journal of Strafvordering Indonesian
Dudik Djaja Sidarta
Universitas Dr. Soetomo Surabaya
Law, Crime, Criminology & Criminal Justice

Published : 2 Documents Claim Missing Document
Claim Missing Document
Check
Articles

Found 2 Documents
Search

 1 
Juridical Analysis of the Application of Reverse Proof in Corruption Cases Edi Bagus Waluyo Yuda Teguh Rahayu; Dudik Djaja Sidarta; Subekti Subekti
Ipso Jure Vol. 2 No. 12 (2026): Ipso Jure - January
Publisher : PT. Anagata Sembagi Education

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.62872/3cpq5e41

Abstract

This article discusses the juridical construction and implications of applying reverse burden of proof in corruption cases in Indonesia, with emphasis on its relation to the principle of legality and the presumption of innocence as fundamental principles in criminal law. The application of reverse burden of proof as regulated in Law Number 31 of 1999 in conjunction with Law Number 20 of 2001 has sparked juridical debate regarding the extent to which this mechanism can be accepted within the framework of a rule-of-law state that upholds the principles of a fair trial and the protection of citizens' constitutional rights. Through a normative juridical research method, this article examines the normative tensions that arise when reverse burden of proof is confronted with the principle of non-self-incrimination and the concept of unlawful acts as essential elements in corruption crimes. The analysis results indicate that reverse burden of proof has a legitimate basis as an effort to combat corruption, which is considered an extraordinary crime, but its use must be positioned as a right, not an obligation of the defendant. Furthermore, its application cannot replace the state's duty to legally prove the elements of a criminal act, particularly the element of unlawfulness. Thus, the reverse burden of proof mechanism must be understood as a limited and balanced evidentiary strategy, to ensure that the judicial process remains within constitutional boundaries.
Analysis of the Proof of Gratuity as a Criminal Act of Corruption in Criminal Justice Nurfathiana F; Subekti Subekti; Dudik Djaja Sidarta
Journal of Strafvordering Indonesian Vol. 2 No. 6 (2026): JOSI - JANUARY
Publisher : PT. Anagata Sembagi Education

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.62872/z4akxw44

Abstract

This article examines the construction of proof of gratification as a form of corruption crime within the Indonesian criminal law system, particularly concerning the application of reverse proof as regulated in Law No. 31 of 1999 jo. Law No. 20 of 2001. This study uses a normative juridical method with a statutory approach, a conceptual approach, and jurisprudence review. The analysis results show that proof of gratification contains a juridical dilemma between the effectiveness of eradicating corruption and the protection of the presumption of innocence principle. Article 12B creates a shift in the burden of proof, which is normatively recognized by the Constitutional Court, but its implementation still raises issues of legal uncertainty and inconsistency in interpreting the elements of positional relationship and the intention of acceptance. The mechanism for reporting gratuities through the KPK essentially provides legal protection, but its effectiveness depends on the compliance of public officials and the capacity for oversight. This study emphasizes the need to strengthen regulations, harmonize jurisprudence, and provide technical guidelines for evidence to ensure a balance between the effectiveness of law enforcement and the protection of defendants' constitutional rights.
Co-Authors Edi Bagus Waluyo Yuda Teguh Rahayu Nurfathiana F Subekti .