Abstrak :
Law enforcement against criminal acts of corruption with the criminal justice
system has not been able to realize one of the goals of eradicating corruption,
namely the maximum recovery of state financial losses. The Attorney General's
Office, as a law enforcement agency that has the authority to investigate
corruption cases, has resolved corruption cases using a Restorative justice
approach as an alternative to settling cases through the criminal justice system
with the aim of recovering state losses.
The purpose of this study is to analyze the effectiveness and obstacles
encountered in efforts to recover state financial losses in the settlement of
corruption cases using a Restorative justice approach. This study uses a
sociological-juridical approach with qualitative research conducted at the
Purwokerto District Attorney's Office. The data used are primary data obtained
from interviews with informants and secondary data obtained from literature
studies. The data will be presented in the form of descriptive narratives and
tables, then will be analyzed using qualitative methods and tested against the
theories of the legal system put forward by Lawrence M. Friedman, the theory of
legal effectiveness put forward by Donald Black, the theory of Restorative justice
put forward by John Haley, and the theory of penal mediation put forward by
Mark S. Umbreit.
Based on the results of the research and the discussion of the data obtained in
the research, it can be concluded that the settlement of corruption cases using a
Restorative justice approach has been effective in recovering state financial losses
incurred as a result of the corruption crime. It is said to be effective on the
grounds that in resolving corruption cases with a Restorative justice approach:
(1) state financial losses can be fully recovered; (2) the alleged perpetrator
understands the mistakes he has made so as to raise awareness about returning
state financial losses; (3) the recovery of state financial losses is carried out
efficiently in terms of time, effort, and cost and can be immediately utilized for
development in the context of increasing people's welfare; and (4) it provides a
deterrent effect to the alleged perpetrators.
There are still obstacles that can slow down the implementation of the
settlement of corruption cases with a Restorative justice approach. The
impediment to Restorative justice in cases of corruption is as follows: (1) There
are still many people who are against it; (2) It has not been regulated by a
statutory regulation; (3) Investigators do not have the expertise to calculate state
financial losses; and (4) The alleged inability of the perpetrators to return state
financial losses all at once.
Keywords: corruption, Restorative justice, recovery of state financial losses
|
