Melola Discovery

← Melola Discovery

Akses terbuka Jurnal

Inconsistency in the Formulation of Article 2 and Article 3 of Law No. 31 of Corrupt Practices Eradication Law and Disparity in Criminal Penalty for Mining Corruption in the Practice of Law Enforcement

Journal of Law and Legal Reform · Vol. 6 No. 3 (2025) · hlm. 1175–1206

DOI
10.15294/jllr.v6i3.19111
ISSN
2715-0968, 2715-0941
Terbit
2025-07-31
Penerbit
Faculty of Law, Universitas Negeri Semarang, Indonesia
Bahasa
eng
Lisensi
creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0

Abstrak

This research discusses the transformation of understanding and law enforcement of the elements of Article 2 and Article 3 of the Corruption Eradication Law. The element against the law is Article 2 of the Corruption Eradication Law. In contrast, the element of abuse of authority is the core of the offense in Article 3 of the Corruption Eradication Law. Thus, it is inappropriate to indict the perpetrators of mining corruption with an alternative form of indictment between Article 2 and Article 3 of the Corruption Eradication Law. Inconsistencies in formulating the elements of the offense and the parameters of the article have resulted in disparities in punishment, errors in assessing the existence of abuse of authority by using unlawful parameters and mixing the application of the two articles. This can be viewed in several Supreme Court Decisions in mining corruption cases, where the elements and subjects of the offense are interchangeable. This research aims to study the inconsistent formulation of the elements of the offense in Article 2 and Article 3 of the Corruption Eradication Law, which has led to disparities in punishment in mining corruption cases. This study is conducted by analyzing several Supreme Court Jurisprudence. This research employs normative research with a statutory approach, concept approach, and case approach. The results of this study aim to provide a recommendation on the concept of against the law and abuse of authority in the Corruption Eradication Law.

Kata kunci

Jaringan kolaborasi para penulis

13 penulis · 25 tautan kepenulisan bersama · 14 lintas organisasi

Arahkan kursor atau ketuk sebuah nama untuk menyorot rekan penulisnya. Klik dua kali untuk membuka halaman penulis.

  • Universitas Trunodjoyo Madura
  • University of Mataram
  • International Islamic University Malaysia
  • University of Sheffield
  • University of Aberdeen
  • Afiliasi tidak diketahui
  • Organisasi berbeda
  • Organisasi sama
  • Afiliasi tidak diketahui
  • Garis lebih tebal = lebih banyak artikel bersama · lingkaran lebih besar = lebih banyak artikel
Tampilkan sebagai tabel
Rekan penulisOrganisasiArtikel bersama
Hayyan Ul HaqUniversity of Mataram1
Dwi MartiniUniversity of Sheffield1
Uswatun HasanahUniversitas Trunodjoyo Madura1
Sartika Nanda LestariUniversity of Aberdeen1
Deni Setya Bagus YuherawanUniversitas Trunodjoyo Madura1
Lalu Muhammad Hayyanul HaqUniversity of Mataram1
Yudi Widagdo HarimurtiUniversitas Trunodjoyo Madura1
MaradonaAfiliasi tidak diketahui1
Ali FikriAfiliasi tidak diketahui1

Afiliasi berasal dari OpenAlex; metadata OAI-PMH jurnal tidak memuatnya. Penulis tanpa ID OpenAlex dicocokkan berdasarkan nama, sehingga dua orang bisa tergabung atau satu orang bisa terpisah.

Sumber metadata: OAI-PMH (metadata jurnal) https://journal.unnes.ac.id/journals/jllr/oai, pertama di-harvest 6 Nov 2026, terakhir terlihat 8 Nov 2026.
Metadata asli (oai_dc) 
<oai_dc:dc xmlns="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:oai_dc="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc/" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xsi:schemaLocation="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc/  http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc.xsd">
	<dc:title xml:lang="en">Inconsistency in the Formulation of Article 2 and Article 3 of Law No. 31 of Corrupt Practices Eradication Law and Disparity in Criminal Penalty for Mining Corruption in the Practice of Law Enforcement</dc:title>
	<dc:creator xml:lang="en">Suastuti, Eny</dc:creator>
	<dc:creator xml:lang="en">Minarno, Nur Basuki</dc:creator>
	<dc:creator xml:lang="en">Sufyan, Akhmad Farid Mawardi</dc:creator>
	<dc:creator xml:lang="en">Poernomo, Gatoet</dc:creator>
	<dc:subject xml:lang="en">Unlawful</dc:subject>
	<dc:subject xml:lang="en">Abuse of Authority</dc:subject>
	<dc:subject xml:lang="en">Mining Corruption</dc:subject>
	<dc:description xml:lang="en">This research discusses the transformation of understanding and law enforcement of the elements of Article 2 and Article 3 of the Corruption Eradication Law. The element against the law is Article 2 of the Corruption Eradication Law. In contrast, the element of abuse of authority is the core of the offense in Article 3 of the Corruption Eradication Law. Thus, it is inappropriate to indict the perpetrators of mining corruption with an alternative form of indictment between Article 2 and Article 3 of the Corruption Eradication Law. Inconsistencies in formulating the elements of the offense and the parameters of the article have resulted in disparities in punishment, errors in assessing the existence of abuse of authority by using unlawful parameters and mixing the application of the two articles. This can be viewed in several Supreme Court Decisions in mining corruption cases, where the elements and subjects of the offense are interchangeable. This research aims to study the inconsistent formulation of the elements of the offense in Article 2 and Article 3 of the Corruption Eradication Law, which has led to disparities in punishment in mining corruption cases. This study is conducted by analyzing several Supreme Court Jurisprudence. This research employs normative research with a statutory approach, concept approach, and case approach. The results of this study aim to provide a recommendation on the concept of against the law and abuse of authority in the Corruption Eradication Law.</dc:description>
	<dc:publisher xml:lang="en">Faculty of Law, Universitas Negeri Semarang, Indonesia</dc:publisher>
	<dc:date>2025-07-31</dc:date>
	<dc:type>info:eu-repo/semantics/article</dc:type>
	<dc:type>info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion</dc:type>
	<dc:format>application/pdf</dc:format>
	<dc:identifier>https://journal.unnes.ac.id/journals/jllr/article/view/19111</dc:identifier>
	<dc:identifier>10.15294/jllr.v6i3.19111</dc:identifier>
	<dc:source xml:lang="en">Journal of Law and Legal Reform; Vol. 6 No. 3 (2025): July, 2025; 1175-1206</dc:source>
	<dc:source>2715-0968</dc:source>
	<dc:source>2715-0941</dc:source>
	<dc:source>10.15294/jllr.v6i3</dc:source>
	<dc:language>eng</dc:language>
	<dc:relation>https://journal.unnes.ac.id/journals/jllr/article/view/19111/4842</dc:relation>
	<dc:rights xml:lang="en">Copyright (c) 2025 Eny Suastuti, Nur Basuki Minarno, Akhmad Farid Mawardi Sufyan, Gatoet Poernomo (Author)</dc:rights>
	<dc:rights xml:lang="en">https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0</dc:rights>
</oai_dc:dc>