Article Sidebar

Submitted
July 13, 2021
Accepted
September 21, 2021
Published
October 26, 2021
Download
PDF
Statistic
Read Counter : 535 Download : 3580

Main Article Content

Abstract

This study discusses the comparison of the monitoring system of anti-corruption institutions in Asia-Pacific countries, including Indonesia, Hong Kong, Malaysia, Myanmar, and Singapore. Through this comparative study, it is hoped that there will be a more proportional formulation of a supervisory system for anti-corruption institutions, especially in Indonesia. This study uses a normative juridical legal research method with a comparative approach. The legal materials used are primary and secondary legal materials obtained through literature studies and analyzed in a normative juridical manner. This study concludes that the comparative analysis of the anti-corruption agency supervisory system in Asia-Pacific, there are three trends. Low supervision system (laden with intervention) with low political will like Myanmar, proportional supervision but relatively low political will – both like Indonesia and Malaysia, and classic monitoring system (by executive, legislative and internal) but high political will like Hong Kong and Singapore.

Key Words: Anti-corruption institution; supervision; supervisory board

Abstrak

Penelitian ini membahas mengenai perbandingan sistem pengawasan lembaga anti korupsi di negara-negara Asia Pasifik, di antaranya Indonesia, Hong Kong, Malaysia, Myanmar, dan Singapura. Melalui studi perbandingan ini diharapkan akan ada formulasi sistem pengawasan terhadap lembaga anti korupsi yang lebih proporsional terutama di Indonesia. Penelitian ini menggunakan metode penelitian hukum yuridis normatif dengan pendekatan perbandingan (comparative approach). Bahan hukum yang digunakan adalah bahan hukum primer dan sekunder yang diperoleh melalui studi pustaka dan dianalisis secara yuridis normatif. Penelitian ini menyimpulkan, bahwa analisis perbandingan sistem pengawasan lembaga anti-korupsi di Asia-Pasifik, terdapat tiga kecenderungan. Sistem pengawasan rendah (sarat intervensi) dengan political will rendah seperti Myanmar, pengawasan yang proporsional namun political will relatif rendah – baik seperti Indonesia, dan Malaysia, dan sistem pengawasan klasik (oleh eksekutif, legislatif dan internal) namun political will tinggi seperti Hong Kong dan Singapura.

Kata Kunci: Lembaga anti-korupsi; pengawasan; dewan pengawas

Keywords

Anti-corruption institution supervision supervisory board

Article Details

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.

c. Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).
How to Cite
Munawaroh, N. (2021). Perbandingan Sistem Pengawasan Lembaga Antikorupsi Di Asia Pasifik. Lex Renaissance, 6(3), 505–519. https://doi.org/10.20885/JLR.vol6.iss3.art6
Download Citation
Endnote/Zotero/Mendeley (RIS)
BibTeX
Crossref
Scopus
Google Scholar
Europe PMC

References

  1. Buku
  2. Bungin, Burhan, Metodologi Penelitian Kualitatif: Komunikasi, Ekonomi, dan Kebijakan Publik serta Ilmu-ilmu Sosial Lainnya, Prenada Media Group, Jakarta, 2010.
  3. Fajar, Mukti & Yulianto Achmad, Dualisme Penelitian Hukum Normatif & Empiris, Yogyakarta: Pustaka Pelajar, 2013.
  4. Isharyanto, Hukum Kelembagaan Negara (Studi Hukum dan Konstitusi Mengenai Perkembangan Ketatanegaraan Republik Indonesia), Cetakan I, Fakultas Hukum UNS, Surakarta, 2015.
  5. Jurnal/Penelitian
  6. Bak, Mathias, “Overview of Corruption and Anti-Corruption in Myanmar”, Transparency International Helpdesk Answer, 2019.
  7. Chan, Thomas, “Corruption Prevention – The Hong Kong Experience”, Resource Material Series No. 56 113th International Training Course Visiting Experts Papers.
  8. Hean, Soh Kee, “Investigation and Prosecution of Corruption Offences”, Resource Material Series No. 80 The Twelfth International Training Course on the Criminal Justice Response to Corruption Cisiting Expert’s Papers diakses melalui https://www.unafei.or.jp/publications/pdf/RS_No80/No80_ 20VE_Hean2.pdf pada tanggal 14 Oktober 2019
  9. Kapeli, Nur Shafiqa and Nafsiah Mohamed, “Insight of Anti-Corruption Initiatives in Malaysia”, Procedia Economics and Finance (31) 2015
  10. Lim, Vincent, “An Overview of Singapore’s Anti-Corruption Strategy and The Role of the CPIB in Fighting Corruption”, Resource Material Series No. 104, 20th UNAFEI UNCAC Training Programme Cisiting Experts Papers, diakses melalui https://www.unafei.or.jp/publications/pdf/RS_No104/No104_ 18_VE_Lim_1.pdf pada 14 Oktober 2019
  11. Nurtjahjo, Hendra, “Lembaga, Badan, dan Komisi Negara Independen (State Auxiliary Agencies) di Indonesia: Tinjauan Hukum Tata Negara”, Jurnal Hukum dan Pembangunan Vol. 35 No. 3 Juli-September 2005
  12. Siddiquee, Noore Alam, “Approaches to Fighting Corruption and Managing Integrity in Malaysia: A Critical Perspective”, Journal of Administrative Science Vol. 8 Issue I, 2011
  13. Suyatmiko, Wawan dan Alvin Nicola, “Inisiatif Penguatan Lembaga Antikorupsi Indonesia: Komisi Pemberantasan Korupsi 2015 – 2019”, Transparency International 2019
  14. Quah, Jon S.T., “Anti-Corruption Agencies in Asia Pacific Countries: An Evaluation of their Performance and Challenges”, Transparency International 2017, diakses melalui https://www.transparency.org/files/content/feature/2017_ACA_Background_Paper.pdf tanggal 9 Oktober 2019.
  15. Wing-Chi, Hui “Combating Corruption: The Hong Kong Experience”, Tsinghua China Law Review Vol. 6: 239 2014
  16. Internet
  17. Corruption Perception Index 2018: Statistically Significant Changes https://www.transparency.org/cpi2018 diakses pada tanggal 8 Oktober 2019
  18. Corruption Index Perception 2018: Score Timeseries Since 2012, https://www.transparency.org/cpi2018 diakses pada tanggal 8 Oktober 2019.
  19. Peraturan Perundang-Undangan/Acts/Ordinances
  20. UU No. 19 Tahun 2019 tentang Perubahan Kedua atas Undang-Undang Nomor 30 Tahun 2002: Tambahan Lembaran Negara Republik Indonesia Nomor 6409
  21. The Anti-Corruption Law (The Pyidaungsu Law No. 3, 2013) Myanmar.
  22. The Anti-Corruption Commission Notification No. 3/2015 Myanmar
  23. Special Committee on Corruption dan Complaints Committee, Malaysia
  24. Act 694 tentang Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission Act 2009
  25. Prevention of Corruption Act (Chapter 241) Ordinance 39 of 1960 Singapore
  26. Cap. 204 Independent Commission Against Corruption Ordinance, Hong Kong