Criminal Liability of Political Parties in Corruption Offenses
Abstract
Political parties play a strategic role in advancing democracy; however, they face various issues that negatively impact these organizations. The primary issues include, first, the involvement of political parties in various corruption cases, which diminishes their public image and trust; second, the legal debates surrounding the criminal liability of political parties implicated in corruption; and third, the challenge of imposing criminal sanctions on political parties or corporations recognized as legal entities involved in corruption offenses. Establishing political parties or legal entities as legal subjects provides a foundation for categorizing them as liable under the Anti-Corruption Law and the National Criminal Code. Philosophically, the justification here is the concept of legal personality that validates political parties or corporations as legal subjects. Sanctions may be imposed if a political party is proven guilty of corruption, referencing Articles 46 and 47 of the National Criminal Code. Article 20(7) of the Anti-Corruption Law also supports the imposition of fines as a primary punishment with an additional one-third increase on the maximum penalty. This responsibility is grounded in Article 20 of the Anti-Corruption Law, which specifies the accountability of corporations and/or their management. The findings suggest that judges should consider the trial’s legal evidence, demonstrating the benefits political parties gained from the crime, to justify their criminal liability. Additionally, legislators should revise current laws related to the criminal liability of political parties as corporate entities.
Keywords
Full Text:
PDFReferences
Sajipto Rahardjo, Mendudukan Undang-Undang Dasar Suatu Pembahasan Dari Optik Ilmu Hukum Umum (semarang: Badan Penerbit Universitas Diponegoro, 2007);31.
R.Wiyono., Pembahasan Undang-Undang Pemberantasan Tidak Pidana Korupsi, (Jakarta: Sinar Grafik, 2009); 21–22.
Francis Fukuyama, Memperkuat Negara, Tata Pemerintahan dan Tata dunia Abad 21, Gramedia Pustaka, Jakarta, 2005, hlm.34-37
Peter Mmahmud M, Penelitian Hukum (Jakarta: Kencana Prenada Media Group, 2016):35.
Barda Nawawi Aief. (2017). Tujuan dan Pedoman Pemidanaan (Perspektif Pembaharuan & Perbandingan Hukum Pidana). Pustaka Magister.
Barda nawawi Arief. (2003). Kapita Selekta Hukum Pidana. Citra Aditya Bakti.
Barda nawawi Arief. (2006). Kapita Selekta Hukum Pidana, Citra Aditya Bakti, Bandung: 2003; 13, bandingkan dengan Sudarto, Kapita Selekta Hukum Pidana. Penerbit Alumni.
Barda nawawi Arief. (2007). Masalah Penegakan Hukum dan Kebijakan Hukum Pidana Dalam Penanggulangan Kejahatan. Kencana Prenada Media Grup.
Barda nawawi Arief. (2015). Ilmu Hukum Pidana Integralistik (Pemikiran Integratif dalam Hukum Pidana. Penerbit Pustaka Magister.
Barda nawawi Arief. (2017). Kebijakan Formulasi Hukum Pidana Dalam Penanggulangan Kejahatan (Tindak Pidana Korupsi. materi kuliah Program Doktor Ilmu Hukum Universitas Diponegoro.
Barda Nawawi Arief. (n.d.). Masalah Penegakan Hukum dan Kebijakan, Op,Cit.; 131, bandingkan dengan Barda Nawawi Arief, Kapita Selekta Hukum Pidana,;
Barda Nawawi Arief. (2006). Materi Penataran Hukum Pidana dan kriminologi kerjasama ASPEHUPIKI dan Fakultas Hukum Universitas Diponegoro. ASPEHUPIKI dan Fakultas Hukum Universitas Diponegoro.
Barda Nawawi Arief. (2008). Kebijakan Hukum Pidana Perkembangan Penyusunan Konsep KUHP Baru. kencana prenada media group.
Fukuyama, F. (2005). Memperkuat Negara, Tata Pemerintahan dan Tata dunia Abad 21. Gramedia Pustaka.
Jimli Assiddiqi. (2005). Kemerdekaan Berserikat ,Pembubaran Partai Politik Dan Mahkamah Konstitusi. Sekretaris dan kepanetaraan MK RI.
Latief, Y. (2017). Negara Paripurna Historistis, Rasionalitas dan Aktualitas Pancasila (Cetakan ke). Gramedia Pustaka Utama,.
Mitchell A. Seligson. (2024). The Impact of Corruption on Regime Legitimacy: A Comparative Study of Four Latin American Countries, The Journal of Politics, Vol. 64, No. 2 (May, 2002), pp. 408-433Published by: Cambridge University Press on behalf of the Southern Political Science Assoc.
Mochtar, Z. A. (2019). Pertanggungjawaban Partai Politik Yang Melakukan Tindak Pidana Korupsi. Jurnal Mimbar Hukum FH UGM, 31Nomor 2, 169.
Muladi & Dwidja Priyatno. . (2015). Pertanggungjawaban Pidana korporasi, cetakan ke-5. Prenadamedia Grup.
Muladi dan Barda Nawawi Arief. (1998). Teori-Teori dan kebijakan Pidana, (Edisi Revi). Penerbit Alumni.
Muladi dan Diah Sulistyani. (n.d.). Pertanggungjawaban, Op.cit,:45, bandingkan dengan Nyoman Serikat Putra jaya, Hukum dan hukum Pidana, Op.cit.
Peter Mmahmud M. (2016). Penelitian Hukum. Kencana Prenada Media Group.
Pujiyono. (2019). Pembaharuan Pertanggungjawaban Pidana Korporasi Melalui Pendekatan Restoratif Justice Dalam Model Dual Track System Selective, Pidato Pengukuhan, disampaikan pada Upacara Penerimaan Jabatan Guru Besar Dalam Bidang Ilmu Hukum Pidana pada Fakultas hukum Uni.
R.Wiyono. (2009). Pembahasan Undang-Undang Pemberantasan Tidak Pidana Korupsi,. Sinar Grafik.
Sajipto Rahardjo. (2007). Mendudukan Undang-Undang Dasar Suatu Pembahasan dari Optik Ilmu Hukum Umum. Badan Penerbit Universitas Diponegoro.
Sudarto. (n.d.). Op.cit, hlm.104, bandingkan dengan Barda Nawawi Arief, Bunga Rampai Kebijakan Hukum Pidana.
Sutan Remi Sjahdeini. (2017). Ajaran Pemidanaan Tindak Pidana korporasi & Seluk Beluknya,. Kencana Prenada Media Group.
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.18415/ijmmu.v11i12.6336
Refbacks
- There are currently no refbacks.
Copyright (c) 2025 International Journal of Multicultural and Multireligious Understanding
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
https://ijmmu.com
editor@ijmmu.com
facebook.com/ijmmu
Copyright © 2014-2018 IJMMU. All rights reserved.