Prospects for Eradicating Corruption Through the Authorisation of Suspect Determination by Judges in Indonesia

Abstract

The objective of this research is to explain the justification behind empowering judges to determine suspects in corruption cases based on trial evidence. Additionally, it aims to discuss the potential for incorporating this authority into future reforms of procedural laws related to corruption eradication. This study employs a normative legal research methodology, utilising both a legislative and conceptual approach. The findings indicate that the fundamental justification for granting judges the authority to determine suspects in corruption cases based on trial evidence includes two key aspects: Firstly, corruption is considered an exceptional crime. Secondly, judges' determination of corruption suspects based on trial facts aligns with the theoretical principles of legal realism derived from the American legal tradition. The regulation of granting the judge the power to determine the suspect based on trial facts in cases of corruption, which is considered an exceptional crime that supersedes the principles of conventional procedural law, has been implemented. This includes two main aspects: firstly, the implementation of the reverse proof system in corruption offences, which is not present in conventional criminal procedure law; secondly, the suspension of the principle of non-retroactivity in the efforts to eliminate acts of terrorism, which is also absent in conventional criminal procedure law. Furthermore, a notable instance of judicial regulation in the identification of suspects has occurred in the context of the crime of Illegal logging, as stipulated in Law Number 18 of 2013 about the Prevention and Eradication of Forest Destruction.