The position of the Prosecutor's Office as Corruption Crime Investigator

Abstract

The aim of this research is to understand and analyze the literal implementation of the Prosecutor's investigative authority regarding criminal acts of corruption. In this writing the author uses a normative juridical method with research specifications in the form of descriptive analysis. Corruption is a special category of crime. In handling these special criminal acts, the investigation is carried out by the prosecutor. However, in this latest development, the issue of investigation has been questioned by various groups. Because it is difficult to determine the boundaries of investigative authority between the prosecutor and the Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK), as far as the authority of the prosecutor in handling specific criminal acts, and to what extent the authority of the Corruption Eradication Commission. Theoretically, the indicators that underlie the authority of the public prosecutor to investigate criminal acts of corruption include philosophical aspects, sociological aspects, historical aspects and practical aspects. The prosecutor's authority to carry out investigations and at the same time prosecute, will eliminate the pre-prosecution chain which has caused cases to go back and forth between the public prosecutor and investigators. With the prosecutor's authority to carry out investigations, cases can be avoided going back and forth, so that the case resolution process becomes efficient and effective.