CRIMINAL LIABILITY FOR IMPLEMENTATION DOCTRINE BUSINESS JUDGEMENT RULE AGAINST DECISIONS OF DIRECTORS STATE OWNED ENTERPRISES LINKED TO CORRUPTION CRIMINAL CASES

Abstract

Discussion regarding criminal liability for the application of the business judgment rule doctrine to the decisions of directors of state-owned enterprises in cases of criminal acts of corruption. The approach method used in this legal research is a normative juridical approach supported by empirical juridical with detailed descriptions, namely: a research that begins deductively with an analysis of the articles in the statutory regulations that regulate the issue of criminal liability for the application of the business judgment doctrine. rules regarding decisions of directors of state-owned enterprises in cases of criminal acts of corruption. The results of criminal liability research on the application of the business judgment rule doctrine to the decisions of directors of state-owned enterprises in cases of criminal acts of corruption are: that directors' liability due to losses due to errors or negligence in making business decisions is a civil responsibility and does not necessarily cause harm to state finances. perspective of criminal acts of corruption. The business judgment rule doctrine should be considered in every corruption case related to the decisions of BUMN directors because apart from the different state financial management paradigms in BUMNs, this doctrine also has similarities with the doctrine of men's areas which lies in the attitude of directors when making business decisions. The obstacles in implementing the business judgment rule doctrine include the substance of legislation (legal substance) and the perspective of legal officials (legal structure).