ANTI-CORRUPTION EDUCATION AND CULTURE (PBAK)

Criminal Offense of Corruption

by:

1. Luh Gde Ary Widayani (P07131216 013)

2. Nita Parna Sari Ayu (P07131216 014)
3. Ni Komang Nia Trijayani (P07131216 015)
4. I Gusti Ayu Pradnya Paramita (P07131216 023)
5. Ni Putu Ayu Dinda Paramitha (P07131216 025)

MINISTRY OF HEALTH OF THE REPUBLIC OF INDONESIA

HEALTH POLYTECHNIC DENPASAR
NUTRITION DEPARTMENT
DENPASAR
2016/2017

1
 Foreword

Thank God we pray to the presence of God Almighty because with His grace I can
finish a paper on "Corruption in Indonesia" is well despite the many flaws in it. We thank the
Parents who continually support in the execution of this paper. We also wish to thank Mr.Dr.
Ir. I Komang Agusjaya Mataram, Kes. as Lecturer subjects Anti-Corruption Culture
Education Health Polytechnic Denpasar that has given this task to the author.
The author really hope this paper can be useful in order to add insight and knowledge
on the impact of corruption for life. The author is also fully aware that in this paper, there are
many flaws and is far from perfect. Therefore, the authors hope their criticisms, suggestions
and proposals for the improvement of paper that had the author made in the future, remember
nothing is perfect without constructive suggestions.
Hopefully this simple paper incomprehensible to anyone who reads it. Had the report
been prepared can be useful for the writer himself and the people who read it. Previous
authors apologize if there are errors of words that are less pleasing and writer begs criticism
and suggestions from you for the sake of this paper improvements in the future.

Denpasar, 23 April 2017

Author

2
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

FOREWORD.................................................................................................... 2
TABLE OF CONTENTS................................................................................. 3
CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION..................................................................... 4
1.1 Background............................................................................................ 4
1.2 Formulation of the problem.................................................................... 4
1.3 Aim......................................................................................................... 5
1.4 benefit..................................................................................................... 5
CHAPTER II DISCUSSION........................................................................... 6
2.1 Corruption Since Used Up Now............................................................. 6
2.2 Types of Corruption................................................................................ 10
2.3 Legislation Related to Corruption.......................................................... 21
2.4 Establishment of the Law Enforcement Institutions, Eradication and Prevention of
Corruption ............................................................................................. 29
CHAPTER III CLOSING............................................................................... 38
3.1 Conclusion.............................................................................................. 38
3.2 Suggestion.............................................................................................. 38
BIBLIOGRAPHY............................................................................................ 39

3
 PART I

PRELIMINARY

A. Background
Indonesia, as one of the countries that have felt the impact of corruption, continues to
be concrete, improvement of the legal aspects, which until now has had a lot of signs in the
form of regulations - regulations, among others MPR XI in 1980, then no less than 10 anti-
corruption laws, including Law No. 20 of 2001 on the amendment of Law No. 31 of 1999 on
Corruption Eradication, then the most monumental and strategic, Indonesia has Law No. 30
of 2002, which became the legal basis for the establishment of the Corruption Eradication
Commission (KPK).
Corruption in Indonesiaexpandedsystemic, For many peoplecorruptionno longer
constitute an offense, but merely acustom, In the entire study comparisoncorruptionbetween
countries, Indonesiaalways occupy the lowest position. This situation can lead to the
eradication of corruption in Indonesia was further enhanced by the authorities.
The development of corruption in Indonesia also encouragedthe eradication of
corruption in Indonesia, But until nowthe eradication of corruption in Indonesiayet show a
bright spot in the rankings see corruption comparisons between countries remain low. It is
also evident from the manycorruption cases in Indonesia,
Therefore, the author will explain about corruption in order to determine the extent to
which action is given to the cases of corruption in Indonesia.

B. Formulation of the problem

1. How corruption trip since the beginning until now?
2. Any types of corruption?
3. Any Legislation Related to Corruption?
4. How Establishment of Law Enforcement Institutions, Eradication and Prevention
of Corruption?

C. Aim
1. To know the trip of corruption since the beginning until now.
2. To determine the types of corruption.
3. To know Legislation Related to Corruption.
4. To determine the establishment of Law Enforcement Institutions, Eradication and
Prevention of Corruption

4
D. benefit
1. Students can understand the course of corruption since the beginning until now.
2. Students can understand the kinds of corruption.
3. Students can understand the Laws Related to Corruption.
4. Students are able to understand the establishment of the Institute of Law
Enforcement, Eradication and Prevention of Corruption.

CHAPTER II
ISI

5
A. Corruption Ever Since Until Now
Corruption in Indonesia has' entrenched since ancient times, the beginning of the
period prakemerdekaan, after independence, the era of the Old Order, New Order era,
continued into the era of reform.

Here is the history of corruption in Indonesia by Rahayu (2011).

1. Pre-Independence period
The following history of corruption in the pre-independence:

a. The Reign of the Kingdom, namely Singosari, Majapahit, Demak and Banten.
Symptoms of corruption and diversion of power are still dominated by the
aristocratic elite, sultans and kings, while the little people barely know or
understand

b. Dutch Colonial Period

Corruption not only by the people of the archipelago, but the Dutch,
Portuguese and Japanese were fond mengorup treasures corps, institution, or
government. Culture is very closed and full of harshness that helped enrich the
culture of corruption in Indonesia, such as the habit of taking utpeti (taxes)
from the people.

2. Post-Independence Period
a. Old Order
The following history of corruption in the old order:

1) In the era of President Sukarno was recorded two times to form the
Anti-Corruption Agency, Retooling Committee for Administrative
(PARAN) and Budhi operation led by Abdul Haris Nasution.
2) Retooling Committee for Administrative (PARAN) as the Anti-
Corruption Agency requires that officials fill the data form the wealth
of state officials
3) Retooling panitian efforts of the State Apparatus (PARAN) eventually
experience a deadlock since most officials hide behind the President,
so it was handed back to the Government (Cabinet Juanda).
4) In 1963 through Presidential Decree No. 275 of 1963, anti-corruption
efforts back in earnest with established agencies in charge of

6
 forwarding the cases of corruption in the courts table called "Operation
Budhi".
5) In the period of 3 months since Operation Budhi executed, state
finances could be saved of approximately Rp11 billion, a significant
number of brackets that time. Because they interfere with the prestige
of the president, finally Budhi discontinued operations.
6) A few days later, announced the dissolution of Operation Budhi
Soebandrio which was renamed the Supreme Command of the
Revolution Apparatus Retooling (Kotrar), chaired by President
Soekarno, and recorded the eradication of corruption at that time
eventually stagnated.
b. the new order
The following history of corruption in the new order:

1) In the State of the Union speech on August 16, 1967, Suharto blamed
the Old Order regime was unable to eradicate corruption. The speech
signaled determined to eradicate corruption to its roots. As a form
established Corruption Eradication Team (TPK) chaired by the
Attorney General.
2) In 1970, Students and Students protesting protested performance of the
Corruption Eradication Team (TPK), which state enterprises in this
case the State Owned Enterprises (SOE) is highlighted as a hotbed of
corruption, the end of President Suharto established the Committee of
Four.
3) Molders Committee comprised four old figures were considered clean
and respectable like Prof. Johannes, IJ Kasimo, Mr. Wilopo and A.
Tjokroaminoto which has primary responsibility is to clean such as the
Ministry of Religion, Bulog, CV K., PT Mantrust, Telkom and
Pertamina. However this committee just a "toothless tiger" because of
its findings on alleged corruption in the state government not
responded.
4) When Admiral Sudomo appointed as Pangkopkamtib, formed Ordered
Operations (Opstib) tasked among others to eradicate corruption. As

7
 time goes Ordered Operations (Opstib) was lost in the wind without a
trace.
c. Reform era
The following history of corruption in the era of reform:

1) President BJ Habibie issued Law No. 28 of 1999 on the

Implementation of the State are clean and free from corruption
following the formation of various committees such as KPKPN, the
Commission, or the Ombudsman.
2) President Abdurrahman Wahid to form a Joint Team on Corruption
Eradication (TGPTPK). The body was created by decree in the
Attorney General Marzuki Darusman and led by Chief Justice Andi
Andojo. However, in the spirit of the passionate to rnemberantas
corruption of members of the team, through a judicial review of the
Supreme Court, TGPTPK finally dissolved. Since then, Indonesia has
experienced a setback in efforts to combat corruption.
3) The process of examining cases of alleged corruption involving the
conglomerate Sofyan Wanandi stopped by Warrant Termination of
Investigation (SP3) from the Attorney-General Marzuki Darusman.
Finally, Gus Dur suffered Buloggate case and led to the resignation
Gus Dur.
4) President Megawati also replace it with what is called a political
compromise. State Enterprises Laksamana Sukardi as not escape the
discussion in the community for his wisdom selling state assets.
5) In 2003 established a commission to address, overcome and eradicate
corruption in Indonesia. The commission was named after the
Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK), established by Act No. 30
of 2002.
6) Based on data from ICW, the Ministry of Health is the institution most
detrimental to the state, at $ 249.1 billion. There were nine cases of
corruption were successfully dealt with law enforcement officials in
the ministry. Furthermore, 46 cases of corruption occurred in the
Department of Health, both the provincial and district / city. There
were also 55 cases of health in RS and 9 at the health center

8
 7) Starting in 2003 till 2014, namely cooperation with INTRAC KPK,
BPK, the Police, and the Attorney General. Data from the National
Survey Institute (LSN) At the election in 2009, as much as <40%
public is willing to accept money from a candidate / party.
8) Data from SuaraMerdeka.com, very prone to money politics in the
2014 election, a majority of respondents said they are willing to accept
the gift of money from candidates / parties amounted to 69.1%.

According Ikhsan, Mohammed (2015) broadly, the culture of corruption in Indonesia

to grow and evolve through three phases of history, namely:

a Phase Age kingdom

Culture of corruption in Indonesia in principle, in the background backs by their
interest or motive power and wealth. The historical literature Indonesian society, especially in
the days of the ancient kingdoms (Mataram, Majapahit, Singosari, Demak, Banten, etc.),
teaches that conflict coupled with motive power to enrich themselves, has been a major factor
in the destruction of these kingdoms.
An example is the kingdom of Singosari maintain a war between relatives and even
up to seven generations of mutual revenge fight for power. Starting from prabu Anusopati,
prabu Ranggawuni, hinggs prabu Mahesa Wongateleng and so on. The same thing is true of
the kingdom of Majapahit which led to several conflicts that led to the uprising Kuti, Nambi,
Suro, and lai-other. In fact we know Majapahit kingdom was destroyed by the civil war that
we know what happened premises paregreg war sepeninggalan Supreme Patih Young. Then
the kingdom of Demak which shows competition between Joko Tingkir and Haryo
Panangsang, and there is also the kingdom of Banten which triggers Sultan Haji seize the
throne and rule with his own father, Sultan Ageng Tirtoyoso.

b Phase Age invaders

At the time of the invaders, corruption has begun to enter into the system of socio-
political culture of Indonesia. Culture of corruption has been built by the colonists kolenial
(mainly Dutch) for 350 years. Culture of corruption is growing among the local luminaries
are deliberately used as a clown politics by the invaders, to run the administrative areas
tertwntu, such as village headman (headman), Chief of the district (county-level or
provincial), and other officials who incidentally is the messengers invaders Dutch to maintain
and oversee certain territorial areas. They are appointed and employed by the Netherlands for

9
harvesting tribute or taxes from the people, is used by Dutch colonists to enrich themselves
by using the rights and lives of the people of Indonesia.

c Phase of the Modern Age

Phase development of corruption in modern times, as now actually began when the
release of the Indonesian nation from the shackles of the invaders. But the culture left behind
by the colonial power, then suddenly vanished. One is left with the legacy of a culture of
corruption, collusion and nepotism (KKN). This is reflected in the behavior of government
officials who have already started in the era of the old order Sukarno, who eventually
growing and thrives in the New Order government of Suharto until today. Again, the pattern
tends to be authoritarian leadership and anti-criticism, making corruption more open
everywhere.

B. Types of Corruption
According to Law No. 31 of 1999 on the Eradication. Corruption updated by Law No.
20 of 2001 stipulates that the seven (7) types Corruption is corruption related to the
country's financial losses, bribery, embezzlement in office, extortion, cheating, conflict of
interest in procurement, and gratuities. Seven types is important for you to know in order
to understand corruption as a criminal act containing legal consequences
1. Related Corruption State Financial Losses
To discuss corruption related to state financial loss then you need to know what is the
state finances. Law No. 31 of 1999 on Corruption states that "the state Finance in question is
the entire wealth of the country in any form, separated or not separated, including in all parts
of state assets and all rights and obligations arising

a. were in possession, stewardship and accountability lembaganegara officials,

both at the central and regional levels;
b. in the possession, the management and accountability of the State Owned
Enterprises / Regional Owned Enterprises, foundations, legal entities and
companies that include the state capital, or companies that include third-party
capital under the agreement with the state. "

Law No. 17 of 2003, said state finances include:

a. all rights and obligations of the state which can be valued in money;
b. everything in cash or in kind which could be used in connection with the
implementation of the state property rights and obligations;

10
 c. wealth of the country / area properties administered alone or by other parties in the
form of cash, securities, receivables, goods, and other rights that can be valued in
money, including the company's wealth was separated on country / regional
companies.
Corruption-related losses to the state described in Act No. 31 of 1999 which is
updated by Act No. 20 of 2001 which is contained in Article 2 and Article 3 which states that
any person who harm the State finances and economy, sentenced to imprisonment with prison
for life or imprisonment for a minimum of 4 (four) years and a maximum of 20 (twenty)
years and a fine of at least Rp200.000.000,00 (two hundred million rupiah) and at most
1,000,000,000.00 (one billion rupiah ) ataudapat sentenced to the death penalty.

Sample case:
a. A civil servant following the learning task and financed by the government, after the
completion of the learning task he was absent from the bond department and worked
in the private sector by utilizing diploma study results.
b. give something to an official because of or in connection with something that is
contrary to the obligation, to do or not do in the office;
c. give or promise anything to a judge with a view to influencing the decision on the
case submitted to him for trial;
d. give or promise something to someone under the provisions of the legislation
specified a counselor or advisor to attend a hearing or a trial, with a view to
influencing advice or opinions to be given apropos.
e. accept a gift or promise (an official), whereas the known or reasonably should be
presumed that the gift or promise was made due to receive a prize or promise (an
official), whereas the known or reasonably should be presumed that the gift or
promise was made because of power or authority relating to office, or according to the
person giving the gift or promise anything to do with his position.
f. receiving gifts or promises (civil servants), while knowing that the gift or promise was
made to move it in order to do or not do something in the office that is contrary to his
duty;
g. received the prize for the civil servants who know that the prize was awarded as a
result or because the recipient has to do or not do something in position which is
contrary to its obligations.

11
 2. Corruption related to bribery
Corruption related to bribery in Act No. 20 of 2001 provided for in Article 5, Article
6, Article 11, Article 12 and Article 13.

a. Article 5
(1) Punishable by imprisonment for a minimum of 1 (one) year and a
maximum of five (5) years or fined at least Rp50,000,000.00 (fifty million
rupiah) and at most Rp250,000,000.00 (two hundred fifty million rupiah) any
person who:
1) give or promise anything to an official or state officials with the intent
to bring the civil servant or the state officials do or not do something in
his post, which is contrary to his duty; or
2) give something to an official or state organizer for or associated with
something that is contrary to the obligation, to do or not do in his
position.
(2) For civil servants or state officials who receive gifts or promise as referred
to in paragraph (1) letter a or b, is liable to the same punishment as referred to
in paragraph (1).
b. Article 6
(1) Punishable with a term of imprisonment of 3 (three) years and a maximum
of 15 (fifteen) years and fined at least Rp150.000.000,00 (one hundred and
fifty million rupiah) and at most Rp50,000,000.00 (seven hundred and fifty
million rupiah) any person who:
1) give or promise anything to the judge with intent to influence the
decision of the case submitted to him for trial; or
2) give or promise something to someone under the provisions of the
legislation determined to be an advocate to attend court with the intent
to influence the advice or opinions to be given in connection with the
case submitted to the court for trial.
(2) For the judge who receive gifts or promise as referred to in paragraph (1)
letter a or advocate who receive gifts or promise as referred to in paragraph (1)
letter b shall be punished with the same as referred to in paragraph (1).
c. Article 11

12
 Shall be punished with imprisonment of a minimum of 1 (one) year and a
maximum of five (5) years or fined at least Rp50,000,000.00 (fifty million
rupiah) and at most Rp250,000,000.00 (two hundred and fifty million rupiah)
civil servants or state officials who receive gifts or promise when known, or
suspected, that the promise or gift is given because of power or authority
associated with his position, or according to the person giving the gift or
promise anything to do with his position.
d. Article 12
Shall be punished with imprisonment for life or imprisonment for a minimum
of 4 (four) years and a maximum of 20 (twenty) years and fined at least
Rp200.000.000,00 (two hundred million rupiah) and at most Rp1,000,000,000,
00 (one billion rupiah):
1) civil servants or state officials who receive gifts or promises, while
known or reasonably suspected that such gift or promises given to
move in order to do or not do something in his post, which is contrary
to his duty;
2) civil servants or state officials who receive gifts, while known or
reasonably suspected that the gift is given as a result of or caused by
doing or not doing something in his post that contrary to his duty;
3) judge who accepts a gift or promise, but is known or reasonably
suspected that such gift or promises given to influence the decision of
the case submitted to him for trial;
4) a person who under the provisions of the legislation determined to be
an advocate to attend the court hearing, receiving gifts or promises,
while known or reasonably suspected that such gift or promises to
influence the advice or opinions to be given, in connection with the
case submitted to the court for trial.
e. Article 13 of Law No. 31 of 1999
Every person who gives a gift or promises to civil servants with a given power
or authority inherent to the office or position, or by giving a gift or promise is
inherent to the position or that position, shall be punished with imprisonment
for a period of 3 (three) years and a fine many Rp150.000.000,00 (one
hundred and fifty million rupiah)
Sample case:

13
 1) A mother came to one of the organizers of new admissions in a state and
expressed a wish for their child to be accepted as a student at the state
universities. The mother promised a reward if the child is accepted.
2) A provider of goods promised fee in cash to a certain percentage of the value
of the project to the auction committee procurement by direct appointment.
The intention of the company to be appointed to handle the project.
3) The patient's family to give something to the clerk of new patients in order
to get priority hospitalization in the ICU of a hospital in which the patient's
bed is always full.

3. Corruption Related to Fraud in Position

This corruption crime stipulated in Article 8, Article 9 and Article 10 of Law No.
31 of 1999 which is updated by Act No. 20 of 2001.
a. Article 8
Shall be punished with imprisonment of minimum 3 (three) years and a
maximum of 15 (fifteen) years and fined at least Rp150.000.000,00 (one hundred
and fifty million rupiah) and at most Rp750.000.000,00 (seven hundred and fifty
million), civil servants or persons other than government employees assigned to
carry out a public office continuously or temporarily, deliberately embezzled
money or securities are saved because of his position, or let the money or
securities are taken or stolen by people another, or assist in performing such
actions.
b. Article 9
Shall be punished with imprisonment of a minimum of 1 (one) year and a
maximum of 5 (five) years and fined at least Rp50,000,000.00 (fifty million
rupiah) and at most Rp250,000,000.00 (two hundred and fifty million rupiah )
civil servants or persons other than public servants who were given the task to run
a public office continuously or temporarily, deliberately falsify the books or lists
specifically for administrative inspection.
c. Article 10
Shall be punished with imprisonment of minimum 2 (two) years and a maximum
of seven (7) years and fined at least 100,000,000.00 (one hundred million rupiah)
and at most Rp350.000.000,00 (three hundred and fifty million rupiah) civil

14
 servants or persons other than public servants who were given the task to run a
public office continuously or temporarily, deliberately:
1) darken, destroy, destroy, or make unusable goods, certificates, letters or lists
used to convince or prove in advance the competent authority, which
controlled for the position; or
2) let others eliminate, destroy, destroy, or make unusable goods, certificates,
letters, or the list; or
3) helping others eliminate, destroy, destroy, or make unusable goods,
certificates, letters or lists.
Sample case:
a) An official with the authority issuing forth transfer of goods on its own
behalf or someone else, but not procedure.
b) An official authorized to issue a letter of indemnity lost abolition of
official cars outside working hours by an employee, when they should be
concerned should compensate loss of the car.

4. Corruption Extortion
Corruption extortion is the effort of coercion by violence or threats of violence so that
he could give up something or hold debt or delete accounts, while the offense of fraud, the
victim was moved to give up something and so on, seduction of a false name, dignity fake, a
ruse, a series of words -said lie.
Corruption extortion under Article 12 points e, f, g Act No. 20 of 2001.
a. Article 12
Shall be punished with imprisonment for life or imprisonment for a minimum
fine of Rp200.000.000,00 (two hundred million rupiah) and at most
1,000,000,000.00 (one billion rupiah):
1) civil servants or state officials that with the intention of enriching himself or
another person unlawfully, or by abusing his power to force someone gives
something, pay or accept payment by piece, or to do something for himself;
2) civil servants or state officials who at the time of performing their duties,
soliciting, accepting or cut payments to civil servants or organizers of other
countries or to the public treasury, as if servants or organizers of other

15
 countries or the public treasury that have debts to him, whereas note that it is
not a debt;
3) civil servants or state officials who at the time of performing their duties,
soliciting or receiving job, or delivery of the goods, as if this is owed to him,
but note that it is not the debt;
Sample case:
a) An institution in the provision of government schools may not draw
money to students other than those listed in non-tax revenues. It turned
out that for certain reasons such as the activities of street vendors,
these institutions require students to pay for these activities.
b) An official immunization using syringes for immunization activities in
Posyandu. The officer charge residents for the cost of replacing the
syringe, when the syringe has been allocated from the government
budget.
c) A procurement committee chairman asking for a fee 15% of the profits
of the winning bidder of goods.

5. Corruption Deeds Cheating

This type of corruption provided for in Article 7 and Article 12 h of Act No. 31 of
1999 which is updated by Act No. 20 of 2001.
a. Article 7
(1) Punishable by imprisonment of at least 2 (two) years and a maximum of seven
(7) years or fined at least 100,000,000.00 (one hundred million rupiah) and at
most Rp350.000.000,00 (three hundred fifty fifty million rupiah):
1) contractor, a building which at the time of making the building, or the
seller of building materials at the time of surrender of building materials,
conduct fraudulent act that may endanger the safety of persons or goods,
or the safety of a state of war;
2) every person charged with overseeing the development or delivery of
building materials, deliberately let the cheating as referred to in paragraph
a;

16
 3) every person who at the time of surrender of consumer goods or the
Indonesian military and the Indonesian National Police fraudulent acts that
could endanger the safety of the country in a state of war; or
4) every person who oversees the delivery of consumer goods or the
Indonesian military and the Indonesian National Police knowingly allow
unfair practices referred to in the letter c.
(2) For people who receive a supply of building materials or the person receiving
the delivery of goods for the Indonesian National Army or the Police of the
Republic of Indonesia and let the cheating as referred to in paragraph (1) letter a
or c, shall be punished as referred in paragraph (1).
b. Article 12 letter h
Civil servants or state officials who at the time of performing their duties, have
used state land on which there is a right to use, as if in accordance with the
legislation, have been detrimental to the person entitled, even though he knew
that the act was contrary to the legislation.
Examples of corruption cases fraudulent:
1) A supplier sends goods orders does not comply with the specifications
required in the contract of supply of goods.
2) A nutrition officer intentionally provide 1,700 kcal diet amount to the
patient, when in fact the patient get 2,100 Kcal.
Examples of fraudulent cases of corrupt behavior:
1) A patient must queue in the order of a physician's examination, should the
relevant sequence of the 50th, but because there are families working at
the hospital, he gets ease ranks 10th.
2) A student makes clinical practice activity report using the actual data-
sharing homemade manipulation.
3) A student made a small note used to cheat on tests.

6. Related Corruption Conflict of Interest in Procurement

It is stipulated in Article 12 letter f of Law No. 31 of 1999 which is updated by Act
No. 20 of 2001. "Civil servants or state officials, either directly or indirectly,
knowingly participated in the chartering, purchasing, or leasing, which at the time of
the act, for all or part assigned to administer or monitor her. "

17
 Sample case:
Goods auction committee wants to decide the winner of the auction, there was a
family member of his superiors who participate in the tender. Finally, the committee decided
the family boss won because the pressure or the trust of his superiors.

7. Corruption Related Gratification

Gratuities according to the explanation of Article 12B Paragraph (1) of Law No. 31 of
1999 in conjunction with Law No. 20 of 2001 that "The meaning of 'gratuities' in this
paragraph is the provision in a broad sense, including money, goods, rebate (discount),
commissions , interest-free loans, travel tickets, lodging, travel perjawalan, free medical
treatment, and other amenities. Gratuities are well received at home and abroad and carried
out by using electronic means atautanpa electronic means. "
Basically giving gratuities value-neutral, meaning that not all forms of gratification is
reprehensible or negative. Gratuities can be categorized as an act of corruption if any
gratuities given to civil servants or state officials considered to give bribes when dealing with
his position and contrary to the obligations or duties. Organizers state or PNS includes all
officers and staff of higher institutions from the central area including the DPR / DPRD, 9
judges, prosecutors, police, rectors of state universities, state / local enterprises, project
leaders, and others are obliged to report gratuities.
Gratuities stipulated in Article 12 letter b of Law Number 31Tahun 1999, updated by
Law No. 20 Tahun2001.
"Officials or state officials who receive gifts, while known or reasonably suspected
that the gift is given as a result of or caused by doing or not doing something in position
which is contrary to its obligations."

8. According to the Corruption practice can be divided into two general categories:
a Adminstrative coruption
That is where everything is run is in accordance with the laws / regulations
berlaku.Akan but on specific individuals enrich themselves sendiri.Misalnya
civil servants recruitment process, which is done in the country, where the
selection test conducted ranging from administrative selection to test
knowledge or ability, but should be granted its own specific.
b The Rule Against Corruption

18
 This means that the corruption is entirely contrary to the law, such as bribery,
abuse of office to enrich himself or another person or corporation.

9. More operational types of corruption are also classified by reformers, M. Amien Rais
said at least four kinds of corruption, namely:
a. Ekstortif corruption, in the form of bribes or kickbacks made employers to the
authorities.
b. Corruption manipulative, as demand for someone who has economic
importance to the executive or the legislature to make rules or laws are
favorable for economic activities.
c. Nepotistic corruption, ie corruption since no ties of kinship, friendship, and so
on.
d. Corruption subversive, those who rob the wealth of arbitrary state to be
transferred to a foreign party to a number of personal gain.

9. Types of Corruption we often encounter, such as:

a. Corruption intellectual, someone who knowingly provide information or
scientific data is wrong for political interests or career.
b. Ethical corruption, wrongdoing or evil cultivated in order to be considered as a
good deed.
c. Moral corruption, common honesty were already very poor, for example,
decreased loyalty to each other.
d. Corruption of working time, for example, relaxing, talking, or taking care of
self-interest at work without reason.
e. Corruption money, an official act of individuals or groups that have the authority
to manage the finances for personal or group interests.

C. Legislation Related to Corruption

Corruption is an extraordinary crime (extraordinary crime) which can cause harm to

the life of the nation and the state, as well as destabilize the country's economy.
Therefore, as the organizer of life of the state government needs to provide protection and
welfare of the community through various policies teragenda in national development
programs. Combating corruption in Indonesia is one of the government's efforts in
undertaking the Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia Year 1945 as contained in
paragraph 4 of the opening.

19
 Laws and regulations related to corruption in Indonesia have long been in effect since
the Old Order, namely in 1957 when the enactment of the Military Administrator No. PRT
/ PM / 06/1957. In the development of laws related to corruption experienced a renewal /
revision. Systems and regulations related to corruption, such as in the form of MPR, law,
government regulations, and the Presidential Decree.

1. Decree of the People's Consultative Assembly (MPR)

MPR associated with corruption is MPR Decree Number I / MPR / 1998 regarding the
State Clean and Free of Corruption, Collusion and Nepotism. However, after the
amendment of the 1945 Constitution and reaffirmed by the Law No. 10 of 2004 on the
order of legislation and regulations mentioned that the type and hierarchy of legislation is
the 1945 Constitution, Law or Government Regulation in Lieu of Law, Government
Regulation, Regulation President, and Local Regulations. Thus, MPR no longer included
in the hierarchy of legislation.

2. Constitution
NO. RULE NUMBER TITLE RULE OF LAW

1. Act No. 11 of 1980 Crime of Bribery

2. Law No. 6 of 1983 General Provisions and Tax Procedures

6-1983 Law Changes On General Provisions and

3. Law No. 9 of 1994
Tax Procedures

State Implementation of the Clean and Free from

4. Act No. 28 of 1999
Corruption, Collusion and Nepotism

5. Law No. 3 of 1971 Eradication of Corruption

6-1983 Second Amendment Law On General

6. Act No. 16 of 2000
Provisions and Tax Procedures

Amendment to the Act No. 31 Year 1999 on

7. Act No. 20 of 2001
Eradication of Corruption

8. Law No. 2 of 2002 Indonesian National Police

9. Law No. 30 of 2002 Corruption Eradication Commission

10. Act No. 24 of 2003 Constitutional Court

11. Law No. 16 of 2004 Attorney of the Republic Indonesia

20
12. Law No. 1 of 2006 Mutual Assistance in Criminal Matters

Ratification of the United Nations Convention

13. Act No. 7 of 2006 against Corruption, 2003 (United Nations
Convention against Corruption, 2003)

14. Law Number 15 Year 2006 Audit Board of the Republic of Indonesia

Third Amendment Act No. 6 of 1983 About

15. Act No. 28 of 2007
General Provisions and Tax Procedures

16. Act No. 14 of 2008 Public Information

Ratification of the United Nations Convention

Against Transnational Organized Crime (United
17. Law No. 5 of 2009
Nations Convention Against Transnational
Organized Crime)

18. Law No. 25 of 2009 Public service

19. Law Number 46 Year 2009 Corruption Trial

20. Law No. 48 of 2009 Judicial power

Revocation of Government Regulation in Lieu of

Law No. 4 of 2009 on Amendments to Law No. 30
21. Law No. 3 of 2010
of 2002 on the Corruption Eradication
Commission

22. Law No. 8 Year 2010 Prevention and Suppression of Money Laundering

Amendment to Law Number 24 Year 2003

23. Law No. 8 of 2011
regarding the Constitutional Court

Law No. 3 of 1971 on the Eradication of Corruption

In Article 1, paragraph 1 stated:
a. whoever the acts unlawfully enrich themselves or another person, or an agency,
which directly or indirectly harm the state's finances and economy of the state, or
known or reasonably suspected by him that the act was detrimental to the state
finance or state economy;

21
 b. Whoever with the intention of enriching himself or another person or Entity, abuse
of authority, opportunity or means available to him because of the position or
positions, directly or indirectly impair state finance and economy of the country.
Act No. 11 of 1980 on the crime of bribery
In chapters 2 and 3 states:
Section 2
Any person who gives or promises something to someone with the intent to persuade
it so that people do something or not do something in the workforce, which is contrary
to the authority or obligations related to public interest.
Article 3
Anyone who receives something or promise, while it knew or ought to suspect that
the granting or promise was intended that she do something or not do something in
the workforce, which is contrary to the authority or obligations related to public
interest.
Act No. 28 of 1999 on State Organizer Clean, Free of Corruption, Collusion and
Nepotism
The law sets out principles or principles of legal certainty, the orderly administration
of the state, public interest, transparency, proportionality, professionalism, and
accountability, which is described in the explanation of Article 3 as follows:
a. the principle of legal certainty, namely the principle of the law states that
prioritizes the cornerstone of legislation, decency, and fairness in every policy of
the state apparatus;
b. principle of orderly administration of the state, the basis on which the order,
harmony, and balance in the control of state administration;
c. the principle of public interest, namely the principle that puts the general welfare
in a way that is aspirational, accommodating, and selective;
d. the principle of transparency, namely the principle that open up to the public's
right to obtain correct information, honest, and do not discriminate on the
implementation of the country with regard to the protection of personal rights,
class, and a state secret;
e. principle of proportionality, the principle of prioritizing balance between the rights
and obligations of state officials;

22
 f. professionalism principle, namely the principle of prioritizing skills based on the
code of conduct and the provisions of the legislation in force;
g. the principle of accountability, which is the principle which determines that every
activity and final results of the activities of state officials should be accountable to
the community or the people as the supreme sovereign state in accordance with
the provisions of applicable law.
Law No. 31 of 1999, amended by No. 20 of 2001 on Corruption Eradication
Article 2 (1)
Any person who acts unlawfully enrich themselves or another person or a corporation
that could harm the state finance and economy of the country.
Article 3
Anyone with the intention of enriching himself or another person or corporation,
abuse of authority, opportunity or means available to him because of the position or
positions that could harm the state finance and economy of the country.
Article 21
Any person who intentionally prevent, hinder, or interrupt, either directly or indirectly
any investigation, prosecution and examination before the court against the suspects
and the accused or witnesses in corruption cases, shall be punished with imprisonment
of minimum 3 (three) years and a maximum 12 (twelve) years and a fine of at least
Rp150.000.000,00 (one hundred and fifty million rupiah) and at most
Rp600.000.000,00 (six hundred million rupiah).
Article 22
If someone intentionally did not give details or a member untrue, shall be punished
with imprisonment of minimum 3 (three) years and a maximum of twelve (12) years
and or a fine of at least Rp150.000.000,00 (one hundred and fifty million rupiah ) and
most Rp600.000.000,00 (six hundred million rupiah).
Article 23
A sentence of imprisonment for a minimum of one (1) year and a maximum of 6
(Six) years and a fine of at least Rp50,000,000.00 (fifty
million rupiah) and at most Rp300,000,000.00 (three hundred million rupiah)
for those who do corruption.
Law No. 30 of 2002 on the Corruption Eradication Commission

23
 KPK is a state institution in carrying out its duties and authorities are independent and
free from influence of any power. The law contains the duties, functions and authority
of the KPK in eradicating corruption.

3. Government regulations

NO. RULE NUMBER TITLE REGULATION

Government Regulation No. 19

1. Joint Team on Corruption Eradication
Year 2000

Procedures for Public Participation and the

Government Regulation No. 71
2. Award in the Prevention and Eradication of
Year 2000
Corruption

Government Regulation No. 57 of Procedures for Special Protection Reporting

3.
2003 and Witnesses For Money Laundering

Government Regulation No. 63 Human resource management system of the

4.
Year 2005 Corruption Eradication Commission

Government Regulation No. 8 of Financial Reporting And Performance

5.
2006 Government Agencies

Financial Position Rights Protection And

Government Regulation No. 29 of
6. Security Protocols Leader of the Corruption
2006
Eradication Commission

Government Regulation No. 60 of

7. Government Internal Control System
2008

Amendment to Government Regulation No.

29 of 2006 on the Rights of Finance, the
Government Regulation No. 36 of
8. Status Protocol, Protection And Safety
2009
Leader of the Corruption Eradication
Commission

4. Presidential decree

NO. RULE NUMBER TITLE REGULATION

24
 National Coordinating Committee of the
1. Presidential Decree No. 1 of 2004 Prevention and Combating Money
Laundering

Diversion Organization, Administration and

Presidential Decree No. 45 of Finance General Secretariat of State Officials
2.
2004 Wealth Audit Commission for Corruption
Eradication Commission

Presidential Decree No. 59 of Formation of Anti-Corruption Court In

3.
2004 Central Jakarta District Court

Presidential Decree No. 10 of Task Termination and Dissolution of the

4.
2007 Coordinating Team Eradication of Corruption

5. Presidential instruction
NO
RULE NUMBER TITLE REGULATION
.

Presidential Instruction No. 30 of

1. Corruption, Collusion and Nepotism
1998

PI 2/2004 Smooth Implementation Support

Presidential Instruction No. 2 of Legal Process By the Corruption Eradication
2.
2004 Commission and the Governing of the
Province of Nanggroe Aceh Darussalam

Presidential Instruction No. 5 of

3. Acceleration of Corruption Eradication
2004

Presidential Instruction No. 9 of Action Plan for the Prevention and

4.
2011 Combating of Corruption in 2011

Presidential Instruction No. 2 of And Peberantasan Corruption Prevention

5.
2014 Action 2014

Presidential Instruction No. 5 of 2004 on Corruption Eradication Acceleration

Presidential Instruction is addressed to all government officials are included in the
category of the organizer in accordance to Law No. 28 of 1999 on the administration
of the State are clean and free from corruption and nepotism to immediately report to
the commission to eradicate corruption. One of the president's instruction addressed to

25
 the Minister of National Education to provide education which contains the substance
of planting the spirit and behavior of anti-corruption at every level of formal and
informal education.
Presidential Instruction No. 2 of 2014 on the Prevention and Combating of
Corruption Action 2014
This decree contains ten instructions for the President in preparing action to prevent
and eradicate corruption in 2014 by referring to the vision and mission and focus of
the medium-term national strategy to prevent and eradicate corruption from 2012 to
2014 according to the conditions of each Ministry / Agency and Local Government.

6. Ministerial regulation

NO
RULE NUMBER TITLE REGULATION
.

Corruption-Free Region Establishment

Justice Minister Regulation Guidelines (WBK) of the Ministry of Justice and

1. Human Rights of the Republic of Indonesia
No. M.HH-01.PW.02.03

Guidelines on Assessment of Performance Unit

PAN candies and Reforms No. Public Services
2.
7 of 2010

Bureaucratic reform PAN

3. Reform Road Map 2010-2014
candies and No. 20 Year 2010

Guidelines for the Determination of Performance

PAN candies and Reform
4. and Accountability Reporting Government
Number 29 Year 2010
Performance

D. Establishment of the Law Enforcement Institutions, Eradication and Prevention of

Corruption

Corruption Eradication Team Building actually started in 1960 with the advent of
regulation has on the investigation, prosecution and investigation of corruption. A
regulation was then confirmed as Law No.24 / 1960. One of the efforts was launched

26
"Operation Budhi", in particular to investigate employees ABRI considered incompetent.
At that time, Dutch companies taken over and used as SOE, led by military officers.
"Operation Budhi" among others investigate Mayor Suhardiman (now Maj Gen Ret)
although eventually acquitted. In late 1967 President Soeharto form of the Corruption
Eradication Team (TPK) with Presidential Decree No. 228/1967 dated December 2, 1967
and still remains the legal basis of Law 24/1960. The team members have other
concurrent position as Attorney General, Chief of Police, Ministry of Justice, and Armed
Forces. The work of the ad-hoc team then managed to drag 9 people indicate "corrupt".

President Soeharto also established a Commission of four in January 1970, to

provide "objective assessment" of steps that have been taken by the government, and give
"consideration of more effective measures to combat corruption". Former Vice President
M. Hatta was appointed as an adviser to the Commission Four. Its members are former
prime minister Wilopo, IJKasimo, Prof. Johannes and Anwar Tjokroaminoto and Chief
Maj Sutopo BAKIN Yuwono became secretary. During the period 1970-1977 only one
high-ranking officials jailed for corruption, the deputy police chief Pol Lt Gen Siswadji
(1977, sentenced to 8 years). Public servants who rewarded the most severe penalty is the
Head of Logistics Depot Kaltim Budiadji, who was sentenced to life imprisonment
(pardon the President reduced it to 20 years). Corruption was menilep state money Rp. 7
6 billion - amount of time it shocking. The rest were convicted corruptors are second tier
and even a few lowly perpetrators of corruption were filed in court. Many cases are
hushed up or goes is not known clearly. In addition to the Commission Four, New Order
government era was also established Anti-Corruption Commission (TOR) in 1970.
Members TOR consists of 66 student activists exponents such as Akbar Tanjung, Thoby
Mutis, Asmara Nababan et al. But has not seen the results already achieved, the
Commission was dissolved on August 15, 1970 or just two months since formed. Many
cases are hushed up or goes is not known clearly. In addition to the Commission Four,
New Order government era was also established Anti-Corruption Commission (TOR) in
1970. Members TOR consists of 66 student activists exponents such as Akbar Tanjung,
Thoby Mutis, Asmara Nababan et al. But has not seen the results already achieved, the
Commission was dissolved on August 15, 1970 or just two months since formed. Many
cases are hushed up or goes is not known clearly. In addition to the Commission Four,
New Order government era was also established Anti-Corruption Commission (TOR) in
1970. Members TOR consists of 66 student activists exponents such as Akbar Tanjung,

27
Thoby Mutis, Asmara Nababan et al. But has not seen the results already achieved, the
Commission was dissolved on August 15, 1970 or just two months since formed.

In 1977 by virtue of Presidential Decree 9 of 1977, the government launched

Operation Control (OPSTIB). In four years (1977-81) Opstib has saved the state money
of Rp 200 billion and 6,000 employees cracking. Opstib is a combination of elements
from the police, prosecutors, military, and of the state apparatus and pedayaguanaan
minister every three months to report to the President about policing in the department
and government service. When Abdurrahman Wahid became president, formed a Joint
Team on Corruption Eradication (TGPTPK). The team is under the Attorney General
Marzuki Darusman. TGPTPK established as a temporary agency until the establishment
of the Corruption Eradication Commission which is mandated by Law No.31 of 1999 on
combating corruption. Unfortunately, TGPTPK consisting of prosecutors, Police and
representatives of the public does not support. Even by the Attorney General himself.
TGPTPK request to investigate BLBI that many stalled process was rejected by the
Attorney General. Finally, TGPTPK disbanded in 2001 when the claim for judicial review
of three Supreme Court Justices never checked by TGPTPK granted by the Supreme
Court.

In 1999 was also formed Wealth Audit Commission conduct of State (KPKPN)
under Law No. 28 of 1999 on the Governing clean and free from corruption, collusion
and nepotism. The Commission, led by Yusuf Syakir is in charge of receiving and
reviewing reports from the organizers of the wealth of the country. A number of officials
have been reported by KPKPN to the police, but many cases are not followed up as in the
case of home ownership and land not belonging to the Attorney General reported that
time, MA Rachman. Under Law No. 30 of 2002 on KPK KPKPN eventually merged into
the Commission section. The last attempt at maintaining KPKPN through Judicial Review
of the petition was rejected by the Constitutional Court.

In the era of Megawati as president, under Law No. 30 of 2002 established the
Corruption Eradication Commission or the Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK).
Superbody Commission which has 5 tasks and 29 extraordinary authority is led by
Taufiqurahman Ruki, Sirajudin Rasul, Amien Sunaryadi, Erry Riyana Harjapamengkas,
Tumpak Hatorang. Not even one year stands, the Commission has received 1,452 reports
from the public about corrupt practices. Ten cases were followed up in the investigation
28
process and already two cases of corruption were successfully transferred to the Anti-
Corruption Court (Abdullah Puteh and Harun lef lef and both have been convicted).
Major corruption cases that have been handled by the KPK was corruption in the General
Election Commission (KPU). The results of the investigation the Commission managed to
throw the chairman and members of the Commission as well as some employees of the
Commission Secretariat to prison. Although often drawn criticism from many quarters,
but what has been done by the Commission bit much to hope for in order to complete
some of the cases of corruption in Indonesia.

After Megawati lengser and was replaced by President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono
(SBY), the first 100 days of his administration was marked by the establishment of the
Corruptor hunters led by the Deputy Attorney General, Basrief Arief under the
coordination of Vice President Jusuf Kalla. The team of the Prosecutor and the Police in
charge of hunting down the convict and corruption suspect who fled out of the country.
Although it has not seen the results that have been achieved, but Tim Hunters reported
criminals already fielded five countries, namely Singapore, USA, Hong Kong, China and
Australia. In addition criminals hunter team has also identified a number of assets parked
abroad as much as Rp 6-7 trillion.

Last anti-corruption team is formed Coordination Team on Corruption Eradication

(Timtas Corruption) formed by President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono (SBY) under
Presidential Decree No. 11 of 2005 on May 2, 2005. There are two main tasks carried
team led by Hendarman Supandji. First, conduct an investigation, investigation and
prosecution in accordance with the provisions of law applicable to the case and / or
indication of corruption. Second, find and arrest the alleged perpetrator of a criminal act
as well as assets in order to discover the optimal financial return. Future task team
consisting of 48 members and come from the police, the prosecutor and the BPK is two
years and may be extended. This team is responsible directly to the President. Every three
months, Timtas Corruption report its progress to the President. Not long after standing,
the team is already busy with the settlement of corruption cases that occurred in the 16
state-owned enterprises (SOEs), 4th Department, three private companies and 12
criminals who escaped.

Unlike the Corruption Eradication Commission has determined the criteria of

corruption cases that can be directly addressed by the commission, in a Presidential
29
 Decree No. 11 In 2005 the legal basis where Timtas Corruption does not mention any
criteria for cases under its authority.

Various Law Enforcement Institutions in Indonesia are as follows:

1. Police
Based on Law No. 2 of 2002 on the Indonesian National Police. Police function is one
of the functions of state government in maintaining security and public order, law
enforcement, protection, shelter and services to the public (Article 2). Police aim to realize
internal security, which includes maintenance of public order and security, order and the rule
of law, the implementation of protection, shelter and services to the community as well as
peace terbinanya society by upholding human rights (Article 4). The function and purpose of
such policing is further elaborated in the main tasks of the police which includes
a. Function
In carrying out the main task, Article 13 states, police functions are:
1) Maintaining security and public order
2) Enforce the law and provide protection, shelter and services to the
community
b. Task
In carrying out the main task, Article 14 states, the police on duty to:
1) Implement arrangements, custody, escort and patrol of the community
and government activities as needed
2) Carrying out any activity in ensuring security, order and smooth traffic
on the road
3) Encourage people to increase public participation, public legal
awareness and adherence of citizens to law and legislation
4) Participate in the development of national law
5) Maintaining order and ensuring public safety
6) Coordination, supervision and technical guidance to the special police,
investigator of civil servants and other forms of private security
7) Conducting the investigation against all criminal acts in accordance
with the criminal procedure law and other legislation;
8) Organizing police identification, police medical, psychological
forensic laboratories and police for the sake of their police duties
9) Protect the safety of body and soul, property, society and the
environment from disturbance of order and / or disasters, including
providing aid and relief to uphold human rights
10) Serve the interests of the community for a while before it is handled by
agencies and / or authorities

30
 11) Providing services to the public in accordance with their interests
within the scope of police duties
12) Carry out other duties in accordance with legislation.

2. attorney
a Task
1) Duties and powers and functions of the Prosecutor in the High Court that the
relevant law in accordance with statutory laws and regulations and policies
established by the prosecutor as well as other tasks assigned by the Attorney
General.
b Function
1) Policy formulation and implementation of technical policy providing guidance
and coaching as well as granting licenses in their respective sectors based on
legislation and policy determined by the Attorney General
2) Organizing and implementation of infrastructure development, management
development, administration, organization and tatalaksanaan and management
of state property are responsible
3) Implementation of both preventive and law enforcement on justice in the
criminal field
4) Implementation of assistance in the field of intelligence judicial, in the field of
public order and public tranquility, relief, consideration, care and penegaakan
law in the field of civil and administrative as well as legal actions and other
tasks, to ensure legal certainty, kewibawaanm government and rescue the
country's wealth, based on legislation and policy determined by the Attorney
General
5) Placement of a suspect or defendant in a hospital or mental nursing homes or
other appropriate place to be determined by the judge because it is not able to
stand on its own or due to things - things that can harm other people, the
environment or herself
6) Granting legal considerations to government agencies, drafting of legislation
and increased legal awareness
7) Coordination, mentoring and technical guidance and supervision, both at home
and with the relevant agencies on the implementation of the tasks and
functions based on legislation and policy determined by the Attorney General

3. District Court
a. Main Duties and Functions District Court

31
 1) Of judicial power is independent judicial power to organize judicial
administration to uphold law and justice (Article 24 paragraph 1 of the
Constitution after the Amendment).
2) Judicial power is implemented by the Supreme Court, other judicial bodies
under the Supreme Court (General Court, the Administrative Court, Military
Justice, Religious Court) and the Constitutional Court (Article 24, paragraph 2
of the Constitution of 1945).
3) Implementation of the Justice powers handed over to the judicial authorities
(General Courts, Religious Courts, Military Courts and the Supreme Court as
the highest court with the main task to receive, investigate and adjudicate and
resolve any matter submitted to him). (Article 2 (1) jo. Article 10 paragraph (1)
and (2).
4) General Court is one of the enforcers of Justice for the people seeking justice in
general (Article 2 of Law # 2 of 1984). District Court the duty and authority,
examine, decide and resolve criminal cases and civil cases at the first level
(Article 50 of Law # 2 of 1986)
5) The court may provide information, consideration and advice on the law to the
agency's authority in the region, if requested (Article 52 of Law # 2 of 1986). In
addition to running basic tasks, the court may be entrusted with tasks and other
authorities by or under the Act.

b. Authority
1) District Court the duty and authority to examine, decide and resolve criminal
and civil cases at the first level
2) District Court can provide information, consideration, and advice on the law
of the government agency in the jurisdiction if requested
3) In addition to the duties and authority of the above, the District Court may
be entrusted with tasks and other authorities under the Act

4. LP (Prisons)
a. Function
The correctional function by decree No. No. M.01.PR.07.03 1985 Article 2 as:
1) Fostering inmate / students.
2) Provide guidance, the structures and managing the work;
3) Doing social guidance / kerokhaniaan inmate / students
4) Perform maintenance of security and discipline of prisons
5) Perform administrative affairs and household
b. In prevention (Preventive) corruption tentun need for an effort to be made to
government officials who are holding a power, among others:

32
 1) Instilling a positive national spirit by emphasizing devotion to the nation
and the State through formal, informal and religion
2) Conduct recruitment on the basis of technical skills
3) Officials are encouraged to adhere to a simple lifestyle and have a high
responsibility
4) The clerks always endeavored adequate welfare and no guarantee of old
age
5) Creating an honest government officers and high work discipline
6) The financial system is managed by officials who have a high
responsibility and be accompanied by an efficient control system
7) Registering the anniversary of the wealth of striking officer
8) Trying to do the reorganization and rationalization of government
organizations.

5. The Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK)

The commission was created by Act No. 30 of 2002. This Act was published
under the consideration of law enforcement to combat corruption are done
conventionally has been shown to have a variety of obstacles. Nowadays corruption has
become an extraordinary crime (extraordinary crime) should be treated in an
extraordinary (extraordinary measures). Public perception of prosecutors and police or
government agency is deemed not function effectively and efficiently in handling
corruption cases so that the public has lost confidence in (losing trust). Moreover,
corruption has proven financial harm the state, the country's economy, and hinder the
national development. Therefore,

6. Corruption Court (Corruption)

Corruption Court is a special court which is in the general judicial system and
located in every capital of the district / city whose jurisdiction covers the area of the
district court of law is concerned. Especially for the Special Capital Region of Jakarta
Corruption Court located in each municipality whose jurisdiction covers the area of the
district court of law is concerned. Corruption Court stipulated in Law No. 46 of 2009 on
the Corruption Court.
Corruption Court has authority to examine, hear and decide the case:
a. corruption;
b. that money laundering is a criminal offense origin of corruption; and / or
c. criminal offenses expressly provided in other laws defined as corruption.

33
 CHAPTER III
COVER

A. Conclusion
Corruption in Indonesia has' entrenched since ancient times, the beginning of the
period prakemerdekaan, after independence, the era of the Old Order, New Order era,
continued into the era of reform.
According to Law No. 31 of 1999 on the Eradication. Corruption updated by Law
No. 20 of 2001 stipulates that the seven (7) types Corruption is corruption related to the
country's financial losses, bribery, embezzlement in office, extortion, cheating, conflict of
interest in procurement, and gratuities.
Systems and regulations related to corruption, such as in the form of MPR, law,
government regulations, and the Presidential Decree. Institutions that have ripened in the
prevention and control of corruption, among others: police forces, prosecutors, the
Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK) and the Court

B. Suggestion
Similarly, a paper which can be the writer explained on Corruption. Hopefully this
article useful to the reader. We realize that in this paper there is still a mistake. Therefore,
criticism and constructive suggestions we expect to improve our next paper.

34
 BIBLIOGRAPHY
a. Center for Education and Training of Educational and Cultural Subjects
Kesehatan.2014.Buku Anticorruption.
b. Anonymous. 2016. Legislation relating to the prevention and eradication of anti
korupsi.Diunduh of:https://ovansite.wordpress.com/2016/04/07/peraturan-perundang-
undangan-yang-berkaitan-dengan-pencegahan-dan-pemberantasan-anti-korupsi/
(Accessed on 23 April 2017).
c. Ikhsan, Muhamad.2015.Sejarah Corruption in Indonesia.Diunduh
of:https://sociologypolitik.blogspot.co.id/2015/05/sejarah-korupsi-di-
indonesia_27.html (Accessed on 23 April 2017).
d. Wikipedia.2017.Korupsi.Diunduh of:https://wikipedia.com, (Accessed on 23 April
2017).

35