<![CDATA[Abstrak Sektor pertanian memegang peranan strategis dalam pembangunan, terutama dalam menjamin ketersediaan pangan bagi Masyarakat. Dalam konteks sektor pertanian di Indonesia, PT Pupuk Indonesia berperan sebagai salah satu korporasi utama dalam penyediaan pupuk bersubsidi yang sangat penting bagi petani. Namun, keberadaan pupuk bersubsidi yang seharusnya memberikan manfaat kepada petani sering kali menjadi sasaran penyimpangan. Kasus penyimpangan distribusi pupuk bersubsidi yang melibatkan PT Pupuk Indonesia dan oknum-oknum terkait mengundang perhatian besar dalam ranah hukum bisnis. Berdasarkan analisis komprehensif, dapat disimpulkan bahwa penyimpangan distribusi pupuk bersubsidi merupakan tipikor yang serius, sebagaimana diatur dalam UU No 31/1999 juncto UU No 20/2001. Pelanggaran Pasal 3 UU tersebut mencakup penyalahgunaan wewenang, pengayaan diri atau pihak lain, dan merugikan keuangan negara. Analisis kasus penyimpangan distribusi pupuk bersubsidi dalam Putusan No. 28/Pid.Sus-TPK/2022/PN Srg mengungkapkan dampak hukum dan sosial yang signifikan. Secara hukum, terdakwa Mahdi dijatuhi hukuman penjara 1 tahun 3 bulan dan denda Rp. 50.000.000,- atas pelanggaran Pasal 3 Jo. Pasal 18 UU No. 31/1999 jo. UU No. 20/2001 tentang Pemberantasan Tipikor. Kata Kunci: Bersubsidi, Bisnis, Korupsi, Penyimpangan. Abstract The agricultural sector plays a strategic role in development, especially in ensuring food availability for the community. In the context of the agricultural sector in Indonesia, PT Pupuk Indonesia plays a role as one of the main corporations in providing subsidized fertilizer which is very important for farmers. However, the existence of subsidized fertilizer which is supposed to provide benefits to farmers is often the target of irregularities. The case of irregularities in the distribution of subsidized fertilizer involving PT Pupuk Indonesia and related individuals has attracted great attention in the realm of business law. Based on a comprehensive analysis, it can be concluded that irregularities in the distribution of subsidized fertilizer are a serious criminal act of corruption, as regulated in Law no. 31 of 1999 jo. UU no. 20 of 2001. Violations of Article 3 of the Law include legitimate protection, enrichment of oneself or other parties, and harm to state finances. Analysis of cases of irregularities in the distribution of subsidized fertilizer in Decision Number 28/Pid.Sus-TPK/2022/PN Srg reveals significant legal and social impacts. Legally, the defendant Mahdi was sentenced to 1 year and 3 months in prison and a fine of Rp. 50,000,000,- for violation of Article 3 Jo. Article 18 Law No.31/1999 jo. UU no. 20 of 2001 concerning Eradication of Corruption Crimes. Keywords: Subsidies, Business, Corruption, Deviations.]]>
Copyrights © 2025
