Electronic Theses and Dissertation

Penelitian ini dilatarbelakangi oleh dugaan terjadinya kriminalisasi tindak pidana korupsi terhadap pejabat publik yang menimbulkan ketidakpastian hukum terhadap keadilan, sebagaimana tergambar dalam perkara importasi gula kristal mentah oleh Menteri Perdagangan Republik Indonesia tahun 2015-2016 yang diduga telah mengakibatkan kerugian keuangan negara sebagai akibat dikeluarkannya kebijakan impor gula kristal mentah.
Penelitian ini menganalisis secara deskriptif dan preskriptif apakah dasar penerapan hukum dalam dakwaan Jaksa Penuntut Umum, dan pertimbangan majelis hakim dalam Putusan Nomor 34/Pid.Sus/Tipikor/2025/PN.Jkt.Pst, sudah tepat dijadikan alasan untuk memidanakan terdakwa Thomas Trikasih Lembong dan apakah vonis pidana dalam Putusan Nomor 34/Pid.Sus/Tipikor/2025/PN.Jkt.Pst, telah mencerminkan prinsip hukum keadilan, kemanfaatan, dan kepastian hukum. Jenis penelitian yang digunakan adalah penelitian hukum normatif dengan pendekatan peraturan perundang-undangan. Pengumpulan bahan hukum primer, sekunder, dan bahan hukum lainnya dilakukan dengan studi kepustakaan atau studi dokumen.
Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa dakwaan jaksa penuntut umum masih belum tepat mengkategorikan tindakan terdakwa sebagai suatu tindak pidana, ini ditandai dengan adanya kejanggalan dalam menentukan besar kerugian keuangan negara hasil analisis jaksa dengan BPKP dan hal-hal yang memberatkan terdakwa. Selain itu, vonis majelis hakim masih bersifat subjektif yang mengakibatkan tidak tercapai prinsip keadilan dan kemanfaatan, karena kekaburan akan kepastian hukum terhadap penggunaan pasal yang tidak memenuhi unsur-unsur delik (Pasal 2 ayat (1) dan Pasal 3 Undang-Undang Pemberantasan Tindak Pidana Korupsi).
Perlu diperhatikan secara detail baik oleh jaksa penuntut umum, majelis hakim maupun aparat penegak hukum yang lain untuk membedakan antara perbuatan yang tergolong pelanggaran administrasi dengan tindak pidana, serta menegakkan prinsip ultimum remedium tindak pidana di lingkup pengadilan demi terhindar kriminalisasi tindak pidana terutama terhadap pejabat publik.

This research is motivated by the alleged criminalization of corruption offenses against public officials, which has created legal uncertainty regarding justice, as reflected in the case concerning the importation of raw crystal sugar by the Minister of Trade during 2015–2016, which was alleged to have caused state financial losses as a result of the issuance of the raw crystal sugar import policy. This study descriptively and prescriptively analyzes whether the legal basis applied in the Public Prosecutor's indictment and the considerations of the panel of judges in Decision Number 34/Pid.Sus/Tipikor/2025/PN.Jkt.Pst were appropriate as grounds for imposing criminal liability upon the defendant, Thomas Trikasih Lembong, and whether the criminal verdict in Decision Number 34/Pid.Sus/Tipikor/2025/PN.Jkt.Pst reflects the legal principles of justice, expediency, and legal certainty. The type of research employed is normative legal research using a statutory approach. Primary legal materials, secondary legal materials, and other legal materials were collected through library research or document study. The findings indicate that the Public Prosecutor's indictment was still inappropriate in categorizing the defendant's conduct as a criminal offense, as evidenced by irregularities in determining the amount of state financial losses based on the prosecutor's analysis in collaboration with the Financial and Development Supervisory Agency (BPKP), as well as the aggravating circumstances attributed to the defendant. Furthermore, the panel of judges' verdict remained subjective, resulting in the failure to achieve the principles of justice and expediency due to the lack of legal certainty regarding the application of provisions that did not satisfy the constituent elements of the offense (Article 2 paragraph (1) and Article 3 of the Law on the Eradication of Corruption Crimes). It is necessary for the Public Prosecutor, the panel of judges, and other law enforcement officials to carefully distinguish between acts that constitute administrative violations and those that constitute criminal offenses, as well as to uphold the principle of ultimum remedium in criminal law within judicial proceedings in order to prevent the criminalization of offenses, particularly against public officials.