Abstract

Corruption is an act that can harm State finances and cause losses to the people's economy. This study aims to determine the arrangement of the burden of proof reversals system of corruption according to the applicable provisions and the proper regulation in implementing the system of reversing the burden of proof to be done optimally. This study uses a normative juridical research methodology with a statute approach. This research's data analysis method is descriptive qualitative by describing the problems and facts in writing from the literature. The study indicates that the burden of proof reversal system concerning the Eradication of Corruption Crimes contained in Law no. 20 of 2001 is limited only to the offense of gratification regulated in Article 12 B paragraph (1) letter a. The withdrawal presumption proof can also be extended to the defendant's property, which is claimed to be connected to the accused's case (Article 37 A) and the property of the defendant (who has not been charged) which is not accused of corruption as a result of a criminal act (Article 38 B). Reversal of the burden of proof in the law of corruption is a reversal of the burden of proof impartial public prosecutor and the defendant alike must prove but / the same element proved different.

Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.