Abstract
Corruption cases are complicated since they involve a number of parties. The goal of this study is to comprehend the distinctions between the Corruption Eradication Commission and the Attorney in Indonesian corruption cases that are intriguing to examine from both a sociological and ontological perspective. Undertaking a legal normative analysis is an intriguing way to investigate the issue. Data were gathered by observation and documentation. Legal data analysis was used to analyze the data. The results indicate that a thorough investigation is required to completely comprehend the distinctions in prosecution between the attorney and the commission for the eradication of corruption in Indonesian corruption cases. This will help academics and state agencies, as well as practitioners and public officials, create more effective laws and policies.
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 callDisclaimer: 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.
