The Existence of Sentencing Guidelines for Bribery Crimes after the Criminal Code in Safeguarding Judicial Independence
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.24843/KP.2025.v47.i03.p04Kata Kunci:
Corruption, Bribery, SentenceAbstrak
This study aims to analyze the existence of regulations concerning sentencing guidelines for bribery cases in Indonesia and their influence on judicial decisions concerning the principle of judicial independence. The research employs a normative legal research method with statutory, conceptual, cases, and comparative approaches. The research findings indicate that the regulation of sentencing guidelines in Indonesia is still not specifically mandated. While the Supreme Court has issued a Supreme Court Regulation on Sentencing Guidelines for State Financial Corruption, which is limited to state financial corruption cases, no specific rules yet exist for bribery cases. Following the enactment of the National Criminal Code which takes effect in 2026, Indonesia will possess sentencing guidelines that apply to all criminal offenses, including bribery cases. This regulation appears to be general in nature in order to uphold the independence of judges when adjudicating cases. Judges are granted the authority to determine the severity or leniency of the sentence for the perpetrator by considering the standards set forth in Article 54 of the National Criminal Code, which is expected to provide rational justification in sentencing, thus achieving legal certainty.
Unduhan
Referensi
Books
Abdurrachman, Hamidah, Rahmad Agung Nugraha, and Nayla Majestya. Palu Hakim Versus Rasa Keadilan Sebuah Pengantar Disparitas Putusan Hakim Dalam Tindak Pidana Korupsi. Yogyakarta: Deepublish Publisher, 2021.
Akbari, Anugerah Rizki, Adery Ardhan Saputro, and Andreas Nathaniel Marbun. Memaknai Dan Mengukur Disparitas: Studi Terhadap Praktik Pemidanaan Pada Tindak Pidana Korupsi,. Depok: USAID, 2017.
Diantha, I Made Pasek. Metodologi Penelitian Hukum Normatif Dalam Justifikasi Teori Hukum. Jakarta: Kencana Prenadamedia Group, 2019.
Heni Siswanto. Hukum Pidana Menuju Pemikiran Positivistik Yang Berkeadilan Dan Berkebenaran. Lampung: Pustaka Media, 2020.
Lilik Mulyadi dkk. Urgensi Pedoman Pemidanaan Dalam Rangka Mewujudkan Keadilan Dan Kepastian Hukum. Jakarta: Kencana, 2019.
Journals
Adonara, Firman Floranta. “The Principle of Judges’ Freedom in Deciding Cases as a Constitutional Mandate.” Jurnal Konstitusi 12, no. 2 (2015): 217–36.
Alief, Andi Muhammad. “Reconstruction of Special Penal Guidelines for State Losses in the Indonesian Criminal Code, Integrity.” Anti-Corruption Journal 10, no. 1 (2024): 149–60. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.32697/integritas.v10i1.1069.
Auliya, Rifki, Selamat Lumban Gaol, and Nurlely Darwis. “Pandangan Mahkamah Agung Republik Indonesia Tentang Disparitas Putusan Pemidanaan Perbuatan Melanggar Hukum Yang Merugikan Keuangan Negara.” Iblam Law Review 4, no. 1 (2024): 99–112.
Djatmika, Prija, Wahbi Rahman, Dwi Edi Wibowo, Robert Lengkong Weku, and Noor Dzuhaidah Osman. “Legal Policy of Disparity in Sentencing as a Ground for Judicial Review in Indonesia Corruption Cases.” Volksgeist: Jurnal Ilmu Hukum Dan Konstitusi, 2025, 503–20.
Firman Floranta Adonara, “The Principle of Judges' Freedom in Deciding Cases as a Constitutional Mandate,” Jurnal Konstitusi 12, no. 2 (2015): 217–36.
Gulo, Nimerodi. “Disparitas Dalam Penjatuhan Pidana.” Masalah-Masalah Hukum 47, no. 3 (2018): 215–27.
Hananta, Dwi, Pertimbangan Keadaan-Keadaan Meringankan, and Memberatkan Dalam Penjatuhan Pidana. “Aggravating and Mitigating Circumstances Consideration on Sentencing.” J. Huk. Dan Peradil 7, no. 1 (2018): 87
Irmawanti, Noveria Devy, and Barda Nawawi Arief. “Urgensi Tujuan Dan Pedoman Pemidanaan Dalam Rangka Pembaharuan Sistem Pemidanaan Hukum Pidana.” Jurnal Pembangunan Hukum Indonesia 3, no. 2 (2021): 217–27.
Kana Martin (2021) “Analisis Yuridis Pembuktian Dalam Tindak Pidana Yang Dapat Dikenakan Sanksi Pemutusan Hubungan Kerja," Dharmasisya: Vol. 1, Article 20. https://scholarhub.ui.ac.id/dharmasisya/vol1/iss2/20.
Latifah, Marfuatul, and Prianter Jaya Hairi. “Pengaturan Pedoman Pemidanaan KUHP Baru Dan Implikasinya Pada Putusan Hakim.” Negara Hukum: Membangun Hukum Untuk Keadilan Dan Kesejahteraan 15, no. 2 (2025).
Ma’arij, Aman, and Gufran Sanusi. “Pedoman Pemidanaan Hakim Perspektif Kebebasan Hakim Dalam Peradilan Pidana Terintegrasi.” Fundamental: Jurnal Ilmiah Hukum 13, no. 1 (2024): 222–35.
Noveria Devy Irmawanti and Barda Nawawi Arief, “Urgensi Tujuan Dan Pedoman Pemidanaan Dalam Rangka Pembaharuan Sistem Pemidanaan Hukum Pidana,” Jurnal Pembangunan Hukum Indonesia 3, no. 2 (2021): 217–227.
Pratama, M Ilham Wira, and Donis Daviska. “Penerapan Pedoman Pemidanaan Bagi Hakim Sebelum Diundangkannya KUHP Baru.” Jurnal Fakta Hukum 4, no. 1 (2025): 13–20.
Theresia, Yohana Maria. “Disparitas Hukuman Perkara Tindak Pidana Korupsi Dan Pedoman Pemidanaan Tindak Pidana Korupsi Oleh Mahkamah Agung.” Journal of Syntax Literate 9, no. 2 (2024): 719–27. https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.36418/syntax-literate.v9i2.
Wibisana, Andri Gunawan, “Menulis di Jurnal Hukum: Gagasan, Struktur, Dan Gaya,” Jurnal Hukum & Pembangunan, 2019, Vol. 49: No. 2.
Wijayanto, I, “Disparitas Pidana Dalam Perkara Tindak Pidana Biasa Di Pengadilan Negeri Kota Semarang,” Pandecta Research Law Journal 7, no. 2 (2012),209-214.
Zuhrah, Adi Sulistiyono, Ridwan, Syamsuddin, Iksan. “Judge Independence in Various Disparities in Corruption Case Decisions at the Supreme Court.” Fundamental: Jurnal Ilmiah Hukum 13, no. 1 (2024): 47–70.
Other Publications:
Indonesia Corruption Watch, Studi Atas Putusan Pemidanaan Perkara Tindak Pidana Korupsi, Lembaga Pelaksana Indonesia Corruption Watch, 2014.
Nasional, Badan Pembinaan Hukum, Hak Asasi Manusia, and Republik Indonesia. “Draft Naskah Akademik Rancangan Undang-Undang Tentang Kitab Undang-Undang Hukum Pidana (KUHP).” Badan Pembinaan Hukum Nasional, 2015.
UI, MaPPI FH. Buku Saku Peraturan Mahkamah Agung Nomor 1 Tahun 2020 Tentang Pedoman Pemidanaan Pasal 2 Dan Pasal 3 Undang-Undang Pemberantasan Tindak Pidana Korupsi, Jakarta, Mahkamah Agung Republik Indonesia Bersama Masyarakat Pemantau Peradilan Indonesia, Fakultas Hu. MaPPI FH UI, 2021.
Young, Warren, and Andrea King. “The Origins and Evolution of Sentencing Guidelines: A Comparison of England and Wales and New Zealand.” Sentencing Guidelines: Exploring the English Model, 2013, 202–17.
Law and Regulations:
The 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia
Law Number 8 of 1981 concerning Indonesian Criminal Procedure Code
Law of the Republic of Indonesia Number 20 of 2001 Concerning Amendments To Law Number 31 of 1999 Concerning Eradication of Criminal Acts of Corruption.
Law Number 3 of 2009 concerning the Supreme Court
Law Number 48 of 2009 concerning Judicial Power
Law Number 1 of 2023 concerning Indonesian Criminal Code
Law Number … of 2025 concerning Indonesian Criminal Procedure Code (final draft).
Unduhan
Diterbitkan
Terbitan
Bagian
Lisensi
Hak Cipta (c) 2025 Kertha Patrika
Artikel ini berlisensi Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
Peer Reviewers
