<![CDATA[Constitutional Court Decision No. 25/PUU-XIV/2016 brought a transformation requiring proof of actual and definite state financial loss (actual loss), rather than merely potential or estimated loss (potential loss). This study provides an in-depth analysis of the alleged corruption case surrounding sugar importation involving Thomas Trikasih Lembong. The case a quo highlights divergent interpretations between prosecutors and judges regarding the valuation of state financial loss. Employing normative legal research, this study aims to analyze how the doctrine of the a quo decision was applied in the case, along with the legal implications of the judges’ interpretation concerning the limits of state financial loss in public policy. The findings show that law enforcement agencies can no longer rely on corruption laws based solely on possibilities, estimates, or potential losses. Furthermore, the court demonstrated legal compliance by rejecting speculative calculations of potential tax and import duty shortfalls, categorizing them as non-criminal potential loss. However, the court remains inconsistent in equating the lost projected profits of State-Owned Enterprises (lucrum cessans) with actual and definite loss, even though the action was proven to be part of an assigned policy discretion without criminal intent (mens rea) for self-enrichment.]]>
Copyrights © 2026
