<![CDATA[The study aims to contribute to understanding judicial inconsistencies in corruption cases and suggest solutions for improving transparency and accountability in the judicial system. The research is based on a normative juridical method using statutory, case, and conceptual approaches. The study examines differences in judicial reasoning at various levels of court, especially regarding the calculation of state losses, the evidentiary basis used by judges, and the extent to which judicial considerations reflect legal certainty and substantive justice. These inconsistencies create disparities in sentencing and may weaken public trust in the judiciary. The novelty of this study lies in its focus on the relationship between judicial inconsistency, state loss assessment, and the potential misuse of judicial discretion in corruption cases. This study contributes to the development of criminal law scholarship by emphasizing the need for clearer judicial guidelines, stronger supervision of corruption case adjudication, and more transparent reasoning in verdicts involving state financial losses. These reforms are expected to strengthen legal certainty, prevent arbitrary decision-making, and promote fairer adjudication in corruption cases.]]>
Copyrights © 2026
