•  
  •  
 

Abstract

The 2023 Indonesian Criminal Code revises the formulation of corruption offenses, including rules on proving state financial losses; however, the elucidation of Article 603 raises questions regarding the competent institution and the evidentiary weight of audit results. This study examines how the provision may perpetuate ongoing debates over experts’ authority to determine state financial losses, which are often perceived as affecting legal certainty, and proposes a reformulation to provide clearer legal guidance. This doctrinal study employs statutory and case law approaches, utilizes qualitative methods, and applies Gustav Radbruch’s perspective as an analytical lens. It finds that Article 603’s elucidation uses general phrasing instead of explicitly designating the Audit Board of the Republic of Indonesia (BPK) as the competent authority. A cross-reference to Article 240 (1)’s elucidation further complicates the matter, as BPK is not listed among state institutions, despite both provisions forming part of the same codification. Furthermore, Article 603’s elucidation may be interpreted as tying the legal construct of “state financial losses” strictly to audit results, thereby creating ambiguity both in the probative value of such reports and in their evidentiary status. As corruption is a materieel delict, such ambiguities may undermine accurate determinations of losses. The study proposes a legal reformulation by clarifying BPK’s constitutional authority, establishing audit reports as authoritative reference yet non-conclusive, and providing clear guidelines for their use in judicial proceedings, including ensuring personnel competence and methodological reliability when used as evidence. Clarifying these issues is essential for credible adjudication, reinforcing certainty and substantive justice.

Download

Share

COinS