HARMONISASI HUKUM PENGATURAN SISTEM GRATIFIKASI PADA UNDANG-UNDANG TINDAK PIDANA KORUPSI DENGAN UNDANG-UNDANG CIPTA KERJA BERDASARKAN KAIDAH OMNIBUS LAW
Abstract
Abstract
Gratification is synonymous with corruption. This is stated in the Law of the Republic of Indonesia Number 31 of 1999 concerning Corruption Crime and Law of the Republic of Indonesia Number 30 of 2002 concerning the Corruption Eradication Commission. Many officials have been caught, because they have been proven to have accepted gratuities. Nevertheless, the interpretation of gratification must have clear truth and the content (substantially) must be able to explain legal events and legal issues regarding the interpretation of gratification. If you look at the Corruption Crime Law, it can be said that the interpretation of gratification is appropriate to provide certainty about the nature of knowledge about the broad interpretation of gratification such as Article 12 B, namely that gratification is used for one type of corruption, but if it is used in the Job Creation Law, Currently, the interpretation of gratification has become a legal debate in educating and providing legal knowledge related to the interpretation of gratification. For this reason, it was appointed as research in order to provide legal certainty and legal harmonization in an arrangement for the formation of legislation regarding a gratification system based on the principles in the discussion of the Omnibus Law. This type of research used in this research is normative legal research. By using primary and secondary legal materials, along with tertiary legal materials as supporting materials. Based on the results of this study, it is said that there are several interpretations of gratification that provide an inaccurate meaning because of the contextual and legal events, such as gratification used in the taxation aspect and examples can be given that perpetrators are corrupt, illegal logging perpetrators, illegal fishing actors, illegal mining actors , and traffickers are free without being taxed. When talking about a person or perpetrator in a criminal act, it must fulfill the elements in a criminal act such as intention, activity (legal life) in committing a crime and the fulfillment of a form of error or act against the law in a criminal act. When the proceeds of crime are in the form of objects of a criminal act to enrich oneself and one's own interests because they have committed acts of corruption, illegal logging, illegal fishing, illegal mining, and trafficking, it will become a different interpretation when it has permanent legal force, so it is necessary there is a proof and it is administrative in nature. Therefore there is a need for legal harmonization in providing an accurate interpretation of the gratuity system regulation in the Corruption Crime Act and the Job Creation Act in terms of the formation rules of legislation and the rules of the Omnibus Law.
Keywords: gratification system; law harmonization; omnibus law
Abstrak
Gratifikasi identik dengan korupsi. Hal ini tercantum dalam Undang-Undang Republik Indonesia Nomor 31 Tahun 1999 tentang Tindak Pidana Korupsi dan Undang-Undang Republik Indonesia Nomor 30 Tahun 2002 tentang Komisi Pemberantasan Tindak Pidana Korupsi. Sudah banyak pejabat terjerat, karena terbukti menerima gratifikasi. Meskipun demikian, penafsiran gratifikasi harus mempunyai kebenaran yang jelas dan konten (secara subtansial) harus dapat menjelaskan persitiwa hukum maupun isu hukum tentang penafsiran gratifikasi. Apabila melihat Undang-Undang Tindak Pidana Korupsi bisa dikatakan penafsiran gratifikasi itu tepat dipergunakan memberikan kepastian tentang hakikat ilmu pengetahuan tentang penafsiran gratifikasi secara luas seperti Pasal 12 B yakni gratifikasi dipergunakan untuk salah satu jenis korupsi, namun apabila dipergunakan dalam Undang-Undang Cipta Kerja, maka penafsiran gratifikasi saat ini menjadi perdebatan hukum dalam mengedukasi dan memberi ilmu pengetahuan hukum berkaitan dengan penafsiran gratifikasi. Untuk itulah diangkat sebagai penelitian dalam rangka untuk memberikan kepastian hukum dan harmonisasi hukum dalam suatu pengaturan pembentukan perundang-undangan tentang suatu sistem gratifikasi berdasarkan kaida-kaidah dalam pembahasan omnibus law. Jenis penelitian yang digunakan dalam penelitian ini ialah penelitian hukum normatif. Dengan menggunakan bahan hukum primer dan sekunder, beserta bahan hukum tersier sebagai bahan pendukung. Berdasarkan hasil penelitian ini, dikatakan bahwa ada beberapa penafsiran tentang gratifikasi memberikan pengertian yang tidak tepat karena melihat kontekstualnya maupun peristiwa hukumnya, seperti gratifikasi yang dipergunakan pada aspek perpajakan dan bisa diberikan contoh bahwa pelaku koruptor, pelaku pembalakan liar, pelaku illegal fishing, pelaku illegal mining, dan pelaku trafficking bebas tanpa dikenakan pajak. Apabila berbicara mengenai oknum atau pelaku dalam suatu tindak pidana, maka harus memenuhi unsur-unsur dalam suatu tindak pidana seperti niat, kegiatan (perstiwa hukum) dalam melakukan kejahatan dan terpenuhinya suatu bentuk kesalahan maupun perbuatan melawan hukum dalam suatu tindak pidana. Ketika terhadap hasil tindak pidana dalam bentuk objek suatu tindak pidana untuk memperkaya diri maupun kepentingan diri sendiri karena telah melakukan perbuatan korupsi, pembalakan liar, illegal fishing, illegal mining, dan trafficking akan menjadi suatu pnafsiran yang berbeda ketika sudah mempunyai kekuatan hukum tetap, sehingga perlu adanya suatu pembuktian dan sifatnya administratif. Oleh karena itu perlunya harmonisasi hukum dalam memberikan penafsiran yang tepat tentang pengaturan sistem gratifikasi dalam Undang-Undang Tindak Pidana Korupsi maupun Undang-Undang Cipta Kerja dalam kaidah-kaidah pembentukan peraturan perundang-undangan maupun kaidah-kaidah Omnibus Law.
Downloads
References
Aksa, Adi Faisal, ‘Pencegahan Dan Deteksi Kasus Korupsi Pada Sektor Publik Dengan Fraud Triangle’, Jurnal Ekonomi, Bisnis, Dan Akuntansi (JEBA), 2018
Arifiyanto, Muhammad Naufal, I Nyoman Nurjaya, Tunggul Anshari Setia Negara, and Bambang Sugiri, ‘Legal Implications of the Decision of the Constitutional Court (Cases Number 57, 58, 59 and 63 / PUU-XIV / 2016, Concerning Application for Material Testing of the Republic of Indonesia Number 11 of 2016 Concerning Tax Waivers)’, International Journal of Multicultural and Multireligious Understanding, 2020 <https://doi.org/10.18415/ijmmu.v7i11.2159>
Dian Ningtias, Ayu, and Tindak Pidana Cyber, ‘Sipendikum 2018’, PRINSIP PEMBUKTIAN MINIMUM (BEWIJS MINIMUM) DALAM TINDAK PIDANA CYBER MENURUT KUHAP DAN UU NO. 11 TAHUN 2008 TENTANG INFORMASI DAN TRANSAKSI ELEKTRONIK JO. UU NO. 19 TENTANG PERUBAHAN UU NO. 11 TAHUN 2008 TENTANG INFORMASI DAN TRANSAKSI ELEKTRONIK, 2018
Justice, Department of, Investigation of the Feguson Police Department, United States Department of Justice - Civil Rights Division, 2015
Kassem, Rasha, and Andrew Higson, ‘The New Fraud Triangle Model’, Journal of Emerging Trends in Economics and Management Sciences (JETEMS), 2012
Mauliddar, Nur, Mohd. Din, and Yanis Rinaldi, ‘Gratifikasi Sebagai Tindak Pidana Korupsi’, Kanun Jurnal Ilmu Hukum, 2017
Mayasari, Ima, ‘Kebijakan Reformasi Regulasi Melalui Implementasi’, Jurnal Rechtsvinding Media Pembinaan Hukum Nasional, 2020
Prison Reform Trust, ‘Prison: The Facts Bromley Briefings Summer’, Prison Reform Trust, 2019
Scott, Russ, and Ian MacFarlane, ‘Ned Kelly – Stock Thief, Bank Robber, Murderer – Psychopath’, Psychiatry, Psychology and Law, 2014 <https://doi.org/10.1080/132187-19.2014.908483>
Sulaiman, Sulaiman, ‘Paradigma Dalam Penelitian Hukum’, Kanun Jurnal Ilmu Hukum, 2018 <https://doi.org/10.24815/kanun.v20i2.10076>
Syahroni, Muh. Arief, ‘Gratifikasi Pelayanan Seksual Dalam Tindak Pidana Korupsi’, 2019
Syahroni, Muh. Arief, M. Alpian, and Syofyan Hadi, ‘PEMBALIKAN BEBAN PEMBUKTIAN DALAM TINDAK PIDANA KORUPSI’, DiH: Jurnal Ilmu Hukum, 2019 <https://doi.org/10.30996/dih.v15i2.2478>
Watkins, Dawn, and Mandy Burton, Research Methods in Law, Research Methods in Law, 2017 <https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315386669>
Yasmirah Mandasari Saragih, S.H., M.H., ‘PROBLEMATIKA GRATIFIKASI DALAM SISTEM PEMBUKTIAN TINDAK PIDANA KORUPSI (ANALISIS UNDANG-UNDANG NOMOR 31 TAHUN 1999 JO UNDANG-UNDANG NOMOR 20 TAHUN 2001 TENTANG PEMBERANTASAN TINDAK PIDANA KORUPSI’, Jurnal Hukum Responsif FH UNPAB, 2017
Authors who publish with Jurnal Hukum Magnum Opus agree to the following terms:
- Authors transfer the copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.. that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access)
