BREAKING THE FLOW IN INDONESIAN LAW ENFORCEMENT: CASE STUDY OF THE IMPLEMENTATION OF DEATH PENALTIES IN CASES OF CRIMINAL ACTIONS

Abstract

Corruption is an extraordinary crime due to the damage it causes to the country's economy. As a criminal act that is classified as an extraordinary crime, corruption needs to be handled extra. It is a historical record in Indonesia that the wave of reforms forced fundamental changes in the law enforcement system to eradicate racism. This effort was realized by the birth of the KPK institution and the amendment of The Corruption Bill Number 3 of 1997 with The Corruption Bill Number 31 of 1999. Furthermore, as a legal system, legal instruments must go hand in hand in order to realize the objectives of the system. The application of sanctions will closely support the effectiveness of the norm, this is in line with the concept that the carrying capacity of sanctions will provide coercion in realizing the goals of the norm. The death penalty has basically been accommodated in Article 2 paragraph (2) of Law Number 31 of 1999, but there are rigid requirements in the elements of the Article a quo which precludes the possibility that certain types of actions cannot be given the appropriate punishment. The Supreme Court as the holder of judicial power has actually issued Perma Number 1 of 2020 which essentially classifies the highest state losses in the corruption stratum as 100 (one hundred) billion. This clearly illustrates that the rule of law has not been able to accommodate cases that have already been rolled out. For example, the case of Heru Hidayat which "fantastically" has cost the state more than 40 (forty) trillion. However, in the Asabri case, even though the prosecutor had demanded that he be sentenced to death, the panel of judges had a different opinion. This is a fundamental question, are legal norms in Indonesia able to accommodate the development of existing laws?