The Juridical Analysis of Constitutional Court Decision No. 87/PUU-XXI/2023 on KPK
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.30659/akta.v12i4.49772Keywords:
Concurrent, Corruption, Criminal, Jurisdiction, Military.Abstract
This study analyzes Constitutional Court Decision Number 87/PUU-XXI/2023 concerning the authority of the Corruption Eradication Commission in coordinating and controlling the investigation, prosecution, and trial of concurrent jurisdiction corruption cases. The research employs normative legal methods with statute and historical approach. The findings indicate that the decision does not alter the justiciability of military courts in handling corruption cases committed exclusively by members of the Indonesian National Armed Forces as the non-concurrent jurisdiction. However, in corruption cases involving both civilian and military elements, the determination of the competent court whether from the general judiciary or military judiciary depends on the defined primary impact of the offense on public or military interests through joint assessment by the Military Prosecution Authority and the State Prosecutor. The legal implications of this decision affirm that the Corruption Eradication Commission retains its authority to handle connectivity corruption cases by adhering to the procedural law on concurrent jurisdiction as regulated in the Indonesian Criminal Procedure Code and Law No. 31 of 1997 on Military Judiciary. During the investigation phase, the Corruption Eradication Commission collaborates with a dedicated concurrent investigation team from the military judiciary comprising military prosecutors and military police. The examination of investigation results is conducted by the State Prosecutor of the Attorney General’s Office instead of the Commission’s prosecutors or the Military Prosecutor. If the case proceeds to trial at the Corruption Court, the prosecution is led by Commission prosecutors, whereas if it is tried in a military court, the prosecution is led by the Military Prosecutor.
References
Huda, A. K. N., & Abdullah, S. (2024). Kewenangan Memeriksa dan Mengadili Pengadilan Militer dalam Penyelesaian Tindak Pidana Umum yang Dilakukan oleh Anggota Militer. Jurnal Hukum, Politik Dan Ilmu Sosial, 3(4), 267–281. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.55606/jhpis.v3i4.4459
Keputusan Bersama Menteri Pertahanan RI, Jaksa Agung RI Dan Panglima Tentara Nasional Indonesia Nomor: 2196/M/XII/2021 – Nomor: 270 Tahun 2021 - Nomor: KEP/1135/XII/2021 Tentang Pembentukan Tim Tetap Penyidikan Perkara Pidana Connectivity.
Mahfud, M. D. (2007). Hukum Tak Kunjung Tegak. Citra Adi Bakti.
Mahkamah Konstitusi RI. (2025). Expert: Mechanism of Connexity, Comprehensive Case Handling. https://www.mkri.id/index.php?page=web.Berita&id=19957.
Markas Besar TNI AD. (2005). Kultur Prajurit TNI Angkatan Darat. CV Lavita Graha.
Marzuki, P. M. (2005). Penelitian Hukum. Kencana.
Mulyana, A. N., Manthovani, R., & Jatna, N. (2020). Mandat Konstitusional Jaksa Agung Muda Bidang Pidana Militer. Rajawali Pers.
Prakoso, A. (2010). Penemuan Hukum, Sistem Metode, Aliran dan Prosedur Dalam Menemukan Hukum. LaksBang.
Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor 87/PUU-XXI/2023.
Salim, H., & Nurbani, E. S. (2010). Penerapan Teori Hukum Pada Penelitian Tesis dan Disertasi. PT RajaGrafindo Persada.
Sari, A. (2018). Kewenangan Peradilan Militer Dalam Mengadili Purnawirawan TNI. Jurist-Diction, 1(1).
Sianturi, S. R. (2010). Hukum Pidana Militer di Indonesia. Babinkum TNI.
The 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia.
Law No. 2 of 1986 concerning General Courts.
Law No. 26 of 2000 concerning Human Rights Courts.
Law No. 30 of 2002 concerning the Corruption Eradication Commission.
Law No. 31 of 1997 concerning Military Courts.
Law No. 39 of 1947 concerning the Military Criminal Code.
Law No. 46 of 2009 concerning the Corruption Court.
Law No. 48 of 2009 concerning Judicial Power.Wijaya, A. A., Gultom, P., & S. (2023). Penerapan Pidana Percobaan Terhadap Prajurit Tentara Nasional Indonesia Yang Terbukti Melakukan Tindak Pidana Insubordinasi Dengan Tindakan Nyata. Jurnal Hukum Sehasen, 9(2), 99–106.
Winarno. (2013). Paradigma Baru Pendidikan Kewarganegaraan. Bumi Aksara.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- The journal holds the copyright for each article published with work licensed simultaneously under Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which allows others to share the work with an acknowledgment of the authorship and early publication of the work in this journal.
- Authors must agree to the copyright transfer agreement by checking the Copyright Notice column at the initial stage when submitting the article.
- The copyright of this document is owned by Journal Master of Notarial Law (M.Kn) UNISSULA and is protected by law
