BRIBERY AND GRATUITY: REGULATORY ANALYSIS AND JUDICIAL RESPONSE

Muhammad Arif Setiawan,Mahrus Ali,Ach. Tahir

doi:10.26623/jic.v6i2.4093

Abstract

<p>This paper is aimed at analyzing the concepts and parameters to determine an act as a bribery and gratuity in the Anti-Corruption Law and court cases. This involved the application of the doctrinal legal research to understand these differences. The results of this study showed that bribery requires a meeting of mind between the bribe givers and bribe recipients which is not found in gratuity. The reporting mechanism and the reversal burden of proof do not apply to bribery while Operation Catching Hand does not apply to gratuity due to its inability to satisfy the provisions of the Criminal Procedure Code. Criminal sanctions are also imposed on both the giver and the recipient of a bribe while the act of a giver in gratuity is not considered as a criminal offense. The study also found that the court failed to apply these essential differences.</p>

Highlights

The results of this study showed that bribery requires a meeting of mind between the bribe givers and bribe recipients which is not found in gratuity
The reporting mechanism and the reversal burden of proof do not apply to bribery while Operation Catching Hand does not apply to gratuity due to its inability to satisfy the provisions of the Criminal Procedure Code
Anti-Corruption Law of Indonesia regulates 7 types of criminal acts of corruption including those associated with state financial losses, embezzlement in office, bribery, extortion, conflicts of interest in procurement, fraud, and gratification

Summary

Introduction

21 This is important p-ISSN : 2541-2345, e-ISSN : 2580-8842 considering the fact that bribe is related to the position of the recipient which is usually public as observed with public servants or state administrators not doing anything in their position or found using their authority or position to conduct some activities.22

Objectives

Results

Conclusion