Article Sidebar

Submitted
December 6, 2024
Accepted
September 17, 2025
Published
September 20, 2025
Download
PDF
Statistic
Read Counter : 404 Download : 474

Main Article Content

Abstract

The urgency of this research is highly necessary in order to alter the paradigm of corruption criminalisation based on punishment towards recovery. The formulation of the problem in this research is whether the shift in the spirit of corruption criminalization from retributive justice to restorative justice can guarantee the realisation of national economic recovery towards the Indonesia Emas 2045 vision and how the reconstruction of restorative justice through the approach of categorizing state losses in the criminalization system in Indonesia. This research uses a normative legal research type that is prescriptive. The results of this study indicated that (1) The teachings of retributive justice in legal practice in other countries such as the Netherlands have been abandoned and adopted the teachings of restorative justice. This teaching is in line with the ideology of Pancasila, so it is very important to be applied in the corruption criminalization system in Indonesia. (2) Restorative justice reconstruction based on state loss categories includes: Category 1 state losses below 200 million plus 1/4, Category 2 state losses of at least 200 million to a maximum of 1 billion plus 1/3, Category 3 state losses of at least 1 billion and a maximum of 5 billion plus 1/2, Category 4 state losses of 5 billion but not more than 100 billion plus 2/3, Category 5 state losses above 100 billion plus 100%. This study concluded that the restorative justice categorisation approach in handling corruption cases will realize efforts to restore the national economy towards the Indonesia Emas 2045 vision.

Keywords

Indonesia Emas 2045 Corruption Building Justice Restorative Justice

Article Details

License

Copyright (c) 2025 Handrawan, Fitriah Faisal, Fuad Nur, Aman Pratama

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:

a. Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.

b. Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.

How to Cite
Handrawan, H., Faisal, F., Nur, F., & Pratama, A. . (2025). Rekonstruksi Restoratif Justice Dalam Pemberantasan Korupsi: Membangun Keadilan Menuju Indonesia Emas 2045. Jurnal Hukum IUS QUIA IUSTUM, 32(2), 475–504. https://doi.org/10.20885/iustum.vol32.iss2.art9
Download Citation
Endnote/Zotero/Mendeley (RIS)
BibTeX
Crossref
Scopus
Google Scholar
Europe PMC

References

  1. Agence Francaise Anticorruption. “CJIP : The French DPA,” n.d. https://www.agence-francaise-anticorruption.gouv.fr/en/convention-judiciaire-dinteret-public.

  2. ———. “The French Anti-Corruption Agency Guidelines,” n.d. https://www.agence-francaise-anticorruption.gouv.fr/files/files/French AC Agency Guidelines .pdf.

  3. Anonymous. “Polda Sumbar Hentikan Penyelidikan Dugaan Korupsi Dana Covid-19.” BPK RI, 2021.

  4. Atmasasmita, Romli. “Rekonstruksi Asas Tiada Pidana Tanpa Kesalahan. ” Jakarta: Gramedia, 2017.

  5. Baidi Sulaiman, Ribut. “Restorative Justice: Implementasi Kebijakan Pemidanaan Dalam Sistem Hukum Pidana Indonesia.” Indonesia Criminal Law Review 2, no. 1 (2023).

  6. Deloitte.com. “The Fight Against Corruption The Sapin II Act, Its Pillars and Their Implementation,” n.d. https://www.deloitte.com/content/dam/assets-zone2/fr/no-index/docs/services/risk-advisory/2024/Book_Loi_Sapin_II_UK_V3.pdf.

  7. Drani, Fuzi Narin. “Penyelesaian Korupsi Dengan Menggunakan Restoratif Justice.” Jurnal Penelitian Hukum De Jure 20, no. 4 (2020): 605. https://doi.org/10.30641/dejure.2020.v20.605-617.

  8. European Commision. “EU Legislation on Anti-Corruption,” n.d. https://commission.europa.eu/strategy-and-policy/policies/justice-and-fundamental-rights/democracy-eu-citizenship-anti-corruption/anti-corruption/eu-legislation-anti-corruption_en.

  9. European Union. “Combating Corruption in the Private Sector,” n.d. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/EN/legal-content/summary/combating-corruption-in-the-private-sector.html.

  10. Fatic, Aleksandar. “Punishment and Restorative Crime-Handling: A Social Theory of Trust, ” 1995.

  11. Global Legal Insights. “Bribery & Corruption 2021,” n.d. https://deroosenpen.nl/wp-content/uploads/2015/12/GLI-BC21_Chapter-14-–-Netherlands.pdf.

  12. Gottschalk, Petter. “Deferred Prosecution Agreements as Miscarriage of Justice: An Exploratory Study of Corporate Convenience.” Journal of Economic Criminology 4 (2024): 100059. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeconc.2024.100059.

  13. Gunawan, Indra. “Penggunaan Denda Damai Dalam Tindak Pidana Ekonomi Use Of Schikking In Economic Crime.” The Prosecutor Law Review 1, no. 2 (2023): 68–86.

  14. Handayani, Febri. “The Pernicious Consequences of Political Corruption in Indonesia,” Prophetic Law Review 1, no. 1 (2019): 1–20.

  15. Harmono, Dwi, Kadi Sukarna, Diah Sulistyani, and Muhammad Junaidi. “Kewajiban Pelaporan Harta Kekayaan Bagi Penyelenggara Negara.” Jurnal Usm Law Review 3, no. 2 (2020): 296. https://doi.org/10.26623/julr.v3i2.2823.

  16. Heriyanto, Dodik Setiawan Nur, “Diplomation as One of the Alternatives to Returning Corruption Assets Abroad,” Journal of Legal, Ethical and Regulatory Issues 24, no. 1S (2021).

  17. Herman, Oheo Kaimuddin Haris, Sabrina Hidayat, Handrawan, La Sensu, and Basri Baco. “Restorative Justice Terhadap Tindak Pidana Korupsi Pengelolaan Dana Desa.” Halu Oleo Law Review 4, no. 2 (2022): 219–30.

  18. Justice.gov. “Deferred Prosecution Agreement,” n.d. https://www.justice.gov/d9/2024-12/mckinsey_dpa_0.pdf.

  19. Koesoemo, Cindy Rizka Tirzani. “Eksistensi Komisi Pemberantasan Korupsi (Kpk) Dalam Penanganan Penyidikan Dan Penuntutan Tindak Pidana Korupsi.” Lex Crimen 6, no. 1 (2017): 62–70.

  20. Legislation.gov.uk. “Crime and Courts Act 2013,” n.d. https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2013/22/schedule/17/enacted.

  21. Lexology. “Anti-Bribery & Corruption,” n.d. https://www.svs.law/app/uploads/2025/03/2025-Netherlands-Anti-Bribery-Corruption.pdf.

  22. Mahmud, Ade. “Model Victim Offender Mediation Dalam Penyelesaian Korupsi Dengan Kerugian Negara Kategori Ringan.” Masalah-Masalah Hukum 53, no. 1 (2024): 35–44. https://doi.org/10.14710/mmh.53.1.2024.35-44.

    DOI: https://doi.org/10.14710/mmh.53.1.2024.35-44

  23. Manthovani, Reda. “Tantangan Mengharmonisasi Restorative Justice Dalam Ius Constituendum Antar Penegak Hukum.” Hukum Online, 2024.

  24. Maria Magdalena Setlight, Mercy, Mario Gerson Mangowal, and Herlyanty YA Bawole. “Pengendalian Hukum Restorative Justice Dalam Penyelesaian Kasus Korupsi Di Indonesia” 5, no. 1 (2024): 122–26. https://ojs.staialfurqan.ac.id/jtm/.

  25. Marlina. “Pengembangan Konsep Diversi Dan Restorative Justice.“ Bandung: Refika Aditama, 2009.

  26. Marzuki, Peter Mahmud. “Penelitian Hukum, 8th Ed. Jakarta”:  Kencana Prenada Media Group, 2013.

  27. Muhammad, Abdulkadir. “Hukum Dan Penelitian Hukum.” Bandung: Citra Aditya Bakti, 2004.

  28. MYS. “Mau Tahu Biaya Penanganan Perkara Korupsi? Simak Angka Dan Masalahnya.” Hukumonline, 2016.

  29. Nawawi Arief, Barda. “Kebijakan Penanggulangan Korupsi Di Indonesia,” 13–19. Pasuruan, 2002.

  30. Ohoiwer, Malik, Abdul Manan, and Mohamad Ismed. “Penerapan Restorative Justice Sebagai Implementasi Dari Ultimum Remedium Dalam Upaya Pengembalian Kerugian Keuangan Negara.” SALAM: Jurnal Sosial Dan Budaya Syar-I 8, no. 6 (2021): 1933–42. https://doi.org/10.15408/sjsbs.v8i6.23229.

  31. Polri. “Data ICW, Ada 791 Kasus Korupsi Di Tahun 2023 Yang Rugikan Negara Rp28,4 T.” Https://Portal.Humas.Polri.Go.Id/Post/Data-Icw-Ada-791-Kasus-Korupsi-Di-Tahun-2023-Yang-Rugikan-Negara-Rp284-T, 2024.

  32. Posner, Richard A. “Economic Analysis of Law (9th Edition). Wolters Kluwer Law & Business, ” 2014.

  33. Purwani, Darwin Jeremia Sitinjak dan Sagung Putri.M.E. “Eksistensi Restorative Justice Dalam Sistem Peradilan Pidana Di Indonesia.” Kertha Semaya 11, no. 11 (2023): 2520.

  34. Purwoleksono, Didik Endro. “Penegakan Hukum Tindak Pidana Korupsi Melalui Upaya Restorative Justice Dalam Rangka Pemulihan Ekonomi Nasional. ”  Universitas Lakidende, 2022.

  35. Putri, Widyani. “Apakah Restorative Justice Sejalan Dengan Nilai-Nilai Hukum Dan Rasa Keadilan Yang Hidup Dalam Masyarakat Indonesia?” Gema Keadilan 9, no. 2 (2022). https://doi.org/10.14710/gk.2022.16251.

  36. Rida Ista Sitepu, and Yusona Piadi. “Implementasi Restoratif Justice Dalam Pemidanaan Pelaku Tindak Pidana Korupsi.” Jurnal Rechten : Riset Hukum Dan Hak Asasi Manusia 1, no. 1 (2019): 67–75. https://doi.org/10.52005/rechten.v1i1.7.

  37. Ritonga, Rolando. “Manifestasi Kewenangan Kejaksaan Dalam Penerapan Denda Damai Dalam Tindak Pidana Ekonomi Guna Mengubah Tatanan Sosial Masyarakat Manifestations of the Prosecutor ’ s Authority in the Application of Peaceful Fines in Economic Crimes to Change the Social Or.” 2023 1, no. 2 (2023): 21–34.

  38. Salsabila, Salsabila, and Slamet Tri Wahyudi. “Peran Kejaksaan Dalam Penyelesaian Perkara Tindak Pidana Korupsi Menggunakan Pendekatan Restorative Justice.” Masalah-Masalah Hukum 51, no. 1 (2022): 61–70. https://doi.org/10.14710/mmh.51.1.2022.61-70.

    DOI: https://doi.org/10.14710/mmh.51.1.2022.61-70

  39. Sandi Ersya Arrasid, Evi Deliana, and Davit Rahmadan. “Implementasi Surat Edaran Jaksa Agung Nomor: B-113/F/FD.1/05/2010 Dalam Penyelesaian Tindak Pidana Korupsi Dengan Kerugian Negara Yang Kecil Oleh Kejaksaan Tinggi Riau.” Jurnal Online Mahasiswa (JOM) Bidang Ilmu Hukum 7, no. 2 (2020): 1–15.

  40. Saputra, Roni. “Pertanggungjawaban Pidana Korporasi Dalam Tindak Pidana Korupsi (Bentuk Tindak Pidana Korupsi Yang Merugikan Keuangan Negara Terutama Terkait Dengan Pasal 2 Ayat (1) UU PTPK).” Jurnal Cita Hukum 3, no. 2 (2016): 269–88. https://doi.org/10.15408/jch.v2i2.2318.

    DOI: https://doi.org/10.15408/jch.v2i2.2318

  41. Setiawan, Muhammad Arif, and Mahrus Ali. “When Double Intention Ignored: A Study of Corruption Judicial Decisions.” Jurnal Hukum Ius Quia Iustum 28, no. 3 (2021). https://doi.org/10.20885/iustum.vol28.iss3.art1.

  42. Sulantoro, Murpraptono Adhi. “Penerapan Prinsip Keadilan Restoratif Pada Tindak Pidana Korupsi Dalam Rangka Penyelamatan Keuangan Negara.” Dharmasisya 1, no. 2 (2021): 915–26. https://scholarhub.ui.ac.id/dharmasisya/vol1/iss2/26/.

  43. Sumardjono, Maria S W. Bahan Kuliah: “Metodologi Penelitian Ilmu Hukum Edisi Revisi. ” Universitas Gadjah Mada, Yogyakarta. Yogyakarta: Fakultas Hukum UGM, 2019.

  44. Syaputra, Eko. “Penerapan Konsep Restorative Justice Dalam Sistem Peradilan Pidana Di Masa Yang Akan Datang.” Lex Lata Jurnal Ilmiah Hukum 3, no. 2 (2021): 234–35. https://doi.org/10.28946/lexl.v3i2.1209.

  45. Syaufi, Ahmad. “Konstruksi Model Penyelesaian Perkara Pidana Yang Berorientasi Pada Keadilan Restoratif.” Yogyakarta: Fakultas Hukum UGM, 2022.

  46. Transparency International Indonesia. “Indeks Persepsi Korupsi Indonesia 2024: Skor Naik Di Angka 37, Peringkat 99.” https://nasional.kompas.com/read/2025/02/11/14052231/indeks-persepsi-korupsi-indonesia-2024-skor-naik-di-angka-37-peringkat-99?utm_source=chatgpt.com, 2025.

  47. Zulfikar, Reza. “Perlindungan Hukum Pemegang Jaminan Fidusia Atas Dirampasnya Objek Jaminan Dalam Perkara Korupsi.” Jurnal Hukum Ius Quia Iustum 29, no. 1 (2022): 47–67. https://doi.org/10.20885/iustum.vol29.iss1.art3.

    DOI: https://doi.org/10.20885/iustum.vol29.iss1.art3