Analysis of the Criminal Responsibility of Perpetrators of Money Laundering in the Case of Online Gambling Site Guarding (Study of Decision Number 217/Pid.Sus/2025/PN Jkt.Sel)

Abstract

The rapid expansion of online gambling illustrates a significant enforcement gap, particularly when individuals involved in maintaining online gambling sites do not engage in gambling directly yet still contribute to the flow of illicit funds that are subsequently laundered through various transactions. The study of Decision Number 217/Pid.Sus/2025/PN Jkt.Sel reveals a legal gap in proving the element of “knowing or reasonably suspecting” with respect to non-operator offenders, thereby necessitating an in-depth analysis of the construction of their criminal liability in money laundering offenses under the Anti–Money Laundering Law (UU TPPU). The objectives of this research are to analyze the criminal liability of perpetrators of money laundering in cases involving the maintenance of online gambling sites, and to examine the judicial considerations in imposing criminal sanctions on money-laundering offenders in such cases. The thesis employs a normative juridical research method with a descriptive-analytical specification. The theoretical framework used includes the theory of criminal liability and the theory of punishment.

The findings of this research show that the criminal liability of the perpetrator of money laundering in the case of maintaining an online gambling site, as examined in Decision Number 217/Pid.Sus/2025/PN Jkt.Sel, demonstrates that the defendant, RE, was legally and convincingly proven to have fulfilled all elements of the offense under Article 3 of Law No. 8 of 2010 on Money Laundering. This is because the defendant was proven to have received, placed, transferred, exchanged, and spent assets that he knew originated from the criminal act of maintaining an online gambling site, with the intention of concealing and disguising the origin of the funds through the use of accounts under other persons' names, layered transaction mechanisms, and the use of the money for personal purposes. The judge's considerations in imposing criminal sanctions on the perpetrators of money laundering in this case were based on the fulfillment of all legal elements under Article 3 of Law No. 8 of 2010, proven through a series of legal evidence (testimonies of witnesses, the defendant, experts, banking documents, and electronic evidence), the absence of justification or excuse, and the obligation of the court under Article 14 paragraph (2) of Law No. 48 of 2009 and Article 193 paragraph (1) of the Criminal Procedure Code to impose punishment on a defendant who is legally and convincingly proven guilty. In sentencing the defendant to 10 years of imprisonment and a fine of Rp. 1 billion cumulatively, the judges considered aggravating circumstances, including the defendant's enjoyment of the proceeds of crime, his evasiveness during trial, and the socially harmful nature of his actions, while the only mitigating factor was his polite demeanor in court.