Analysis of The Authority of Wire breaking by The Prosecutor's Office in The Process of Enforcement of Corruption Law

Abstract

This research analyzes the authority of wiretapping by the Indonesian Attorney General's Office in the process of enforcing corruption criminal law, especially following the amendments in Law Number 11 of 2021. Indonesia, as a state based on law, mandates professional and integrity-driven law enforcement, where the Attorney General's Office plays a crucial role in prosecutors and other authorities. The amendments to the attorney general's law grant additional authorities, including wiretapping, which has sparked debate among the public, particularly concerning potential human rights violations. Evidence in criminal cases is a critical stage requiring valid evidentiary tools. Wiretapping, as a form of electronic evidence, holds significant potential in uncovering corruption crimes, yet its regulations are still overlapping and not fully detailed. This study aims to reconstruct the regulations concerning the Attorney General's Office's wiretapping authority, identify existing weaknesses, and formulate an ideal future regulatory framework for wiretapping in handling corruption cases. Employing a normative legal research method and a statutory approach, this research analyzes relevant laws and regulations, theories of authority, rule of law, evidence, and law enforcement. The analysis reveals that although the ITE Law and Constitutional Court decisions have expanded the recognition of electronic evidence, gaps remain in the technical regulations and oversight of wiretapping implementation by the Attorney General's Office. Regulatory reconstruction is necessary to ensure that wiretapping authority aligns with the principles of due process of law and the protection of privacy rights, thereby strengthening the effectiveness of evidence in corruption cases.