Revocation Of Re-Elected Rights For Corruptor In Public Offices Without Time Limitation The Progressive Law Perspective

Fira Mubayyinah* -  STAI AL Hikmah Tuban, Jawa Timur, Indonesia
DOI : 10.24952/fitrah.v5i2.2196
The problem of corruption has always been a public discussion, not only because of its consequences. But also because the perpetrators of corruption that they caught were from political parties. And it tends to be after they go through the criminal period, re-enter the area of policy holders or authority through political channels again. Additional criminal imposition of revocation of political rights for the corutor is stated in the Decision of the Supreme Court Number: 537k / Pid.Sus / 2014, and Number 1195K / Pid.Sus / 2014. The application is not limited to the period as stipulated in article 38 of the Criminal Code. Revocation of political rights on the one hand is considered contrary to human rights, but revocation of political rights becomes an important punishment imposed, considering that the perpetrators of corruption do not come from political parties. The application of criminal acts is a means of reason to prevent criminal acts. Revocation of political rights which is still debated can have an impact on its implementation. Therefore, in its implementation, of course requires a Law Enforcement Officer who has a step of thinking and progressive steps. Penal punishment is the authority of the Judge. Judges in imposing crimes should rely on the principle of substantive justice and are intended to provide protection to society (social deffence)

Keywords : Korupsi, Koruptor, Hak Politik

  1. Amirullah. “4 Eks Napi Korupsi Gugat Peraturan KPU Ke Mahkamah Agung.” Web Blog. Tempo, 2018. https://nasional.tempo.co/read/1105127/4-eks-napi-korupsi-gugat-peraturan-kpu-ke-mahkamah-agung.
  2. Bakhri, Syaiful. Sistem Peradilan Pidana Indonesia: Dalam Perspektif Pembaruan, Teori dan Praktik Peradilan. Cet. I. Yogyakarta: Pustaka Pelajar, 2014.
  3. Franz Magnis-Suseno, Corruption Corrupts Indonesia: Notes on Corruption from the Corner of Ethics, quoted in his book Wijayanto & Ridwan Zachrie, Corruption Corrupts Indonesia, Causes and Effects of Eradication, PT. Gramedia Main Library, 2009
  4. Irawan, Dhani. “Sejak KPK Berdiri, Ada 220 Wakil Rakyat Korup Dijerat.” Web Blog. detiknews, 18 September 2018. https://news.detik.com/berita/d-4216860/sejak-kpk-berdiri-ada-220-wakil-rakyat-korup-dijerat.
  5. Irianto, Sulistyowati. Problems of Judges in the Law, Courts and Society in Indonesia: Socio-Legal Studies. Jakarta: Secretariat General of the Judicial Commission of the Republic of Indonesia, 2017.
  6. Kristiana, Yudi. Pemberantasan tindak pidana korupsi: perspektif hukum progresif. Jogjakarta: Thafa Media, 2016.
  7. L.Tanya, Bernard. Teori Hukum, Strategi Tertib Manusia Lintas Ruang dan Ge. Cet. IV. Yogyakarta: Genta Publishing, 2013.
  8. Media, Kompas Cyber. “KPK: Hak Politik 26 Koruptor Dicabut Sepanjang 2013-2017.” Web Blog. KOMPAS.com, 26 September 2013. https://nasional.kompas.com/read/2018/09/18/13252541/kpk-hak-politik-26-koruptor-dicabut-sepanjang-2013-2017.
  9. Mertokusumo, Sudikno. Legal Inventions (an introduction). Jakarta: Cahaya Atma Pustaka, 2014.
  10. ———. Penemuan Hukum: sebuah pengantar. Malang: Cahaya Atma Pustaka, 2014.
  11. Rahardjo, Satjitpo. Biarkan Hukum Mengalir: Catatan kritis tentang Pergulatan Manusia dan Hukum. Jakarta: Kompas, 2007.
  12. Times, I. D. N., dan Rosa Folia. “Pencabutan Hak Politik Warga Negara, Bagaimana Aturannya?” Web Blog. IDN Times, 5 November 2018. https://www.idntimes.com/news/indonesia/rosa-folia/pencabutan-hak-politik-warga-negara-bagaimana-aturannya.
  13. Witanto, Darmoko Yudi, dan Arya Putra Negara Kutawaringin. Diskreasi Hakim Sebuah Instrumen Menegakkan Keadilan Substantif Dalam Perkara-perkara Pidana. Bandung: Alpabeta, 2013.
  14. Constitution
  15. Law of the Republic of Indonesia number 31 of 1999 concerning Eradication of Corruption Crimes
  16. Law of the Republic of Indonesia number 20 of 2001 concerning Amendments to Law Number 31 of 1999 concerning Eradication of Corruption
  17. Law number 48 of 2009 concerning Judicial Power
  18. Other sources
  19. Appeal of Public Prosecutor's Memorandum on behalf of Defendant Anas Urbaningrum, 20 November 2014
  20. Memorandum of Appeals of the Public Prosecutor on behalf of Defendant Anas Urbaningrum, 26 February 2015
  21. Decision of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Indonesia Number: 1261 K / Pid.Sus / 2015 dated 8 June 2015 on behalf of Defendant Anas Urbaningrum
  22. Decision of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Indonesia Number 537 K / Pid.Sus / 2014 dated June 4, 2014 on behalf of the Defendant Inspector General of Police Drs. Djoko Susilo, SH., M.Sc
  23. Decision of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Indonesia Number: 1195 K / Pid.Sus / 2014 dated 15 September 2014 on behalf of Defendant Lutfi Hasan Ishaaq.
  24. Decision of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Indonesia Number: 1648 K / Pid.Sus / 2014 dated 17 November 2014 on behalf of Defendant H.M. Rusli Zainal.
  25. Decision of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Indonesia Number: 285 K / Pid.Sus / 2015 dated February 23, 2015 on behalf of Defendant Hj. Ratu Atut Chosiyah, SE.
  26. Decision of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Indonesia Number: 2864 K / Pid.sus / 2015 dated January 13, 2016 on behalf of Defendants Ade Swara and Nurlatifah
  27. Decision of the Corruption Court at the Bandung High Court Number 17 / TIPIKOR / 2015 / PT.BDG dated July 9, 2015 on behalf of Defendants Ade Swara and Nurlatifah.
  28. Decision of the Corruption Criminal Court in Bandung District Court Number 126 / Pid.Sus / TPK / 2014 / P.N.Bdg dated 15 April 2015 on behalf of Defendants Ade Swara and Nurlatifah.
  29. Decision of the Constitutional Court number 42 / PUU-XIII / 2015 dated July 9, 2015 on behalf of Petitioner Jumanto
  30. Decision of the Constitutional Court Number 4 / PUUVII / 2009 dated March 24, 2009 on behalf of Petitioner Robertus
  31. Decision of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Indonesia Number 30 P / HUM / 2018 dated September 13, 2018 on behalf of Petitioner Lucianty
  32. Decision of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Indonesia Number 46 P / HUM / 2018 dated September 13, 2018 on behalf of Petitioner Jumanto
  33. Republic of Indonesia Election Commission Regulation Number 26 of 2018 Concerning the
  34. Second Amendment to Election Commission Regulation Number 14 of 2018 Regarding the
  35. Nomination of Election Contestants for Regional Representatives on 6 August 2018
  36. Republic of Indonesia Election Commission Regulation Number 20 of 2018 Regarding the Nomination of Members of the House of Representatives, Provincial Regional House of Representatives, and Regency / City Regional House of Representatives

Open Access Copyright (c) 2020 Fira Mubayyinah
Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

FITRAH: Jurnal Kajian Ilmu-ilmu Keislaman
Published by Lembaga Penelitian dan Pengabdian Masyarakat
Institut Agama Islam Negeri Padangsidimpuan, Indonesia
Jl. T. Rizal Nurdin Km. 4,5 Sihitang, Kota Padang Sidempuan
Phone: 0634-22080
Website: http://jurnal.iain-padangsidimpuan.ac.id/index.php/F/
Email: fitrah@iain-padangsidimpuan.ac.id

E-ISSN : 2460-2345

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.