ANALISIS PUTUSAN HAKIM PENGADILAN TINDAK PIDANA KORUPSI NO.133/PID.SUS-TPK/2019/PN SBY TENTANG KORUPSI
ANALYSIS OF THE CORRUPTION COURT'S DECISION NO.133/PID.SUS-TPK/2019/PN SBY IN REGARD TO CORRUPTION
Kasus korupsi di Indonesia banyak yang terungkap setelah disahkannya Undang-Undang Pemberantasan Tindak Pidana Korupsi, dan berhasil disidangkan dengan dijatuhi pidana penjara. Namun ada beberapa kasus yang seolah-olah memang sudah diatur dalam persidangan, seperti putusan bebas bagi terdakwa yang bukti-buktinya cukup meyakinkan bahwa terdakwa bersalah Contoh kasus putusan bebas yang perlu diteliti ialah putusan Nomor 133/Pid.Sus-TPK/2019/PN Sby, dengan terdakwa Ratih Retnowati yang menjabat sebagai wakil ketua DPRD Kota Surabaya Periode 2014-2019. Terdakwa tersangkut kasus korupsi dana hibah Jaringan Aspirasi Masyarakat (JASMAS) tahun 2016. Terdakwa yang memberikan keterangan bahwa dirinya tidak mengetahui adanya 6 (enam) proposal yang diluar Dapil terdakwa, bukan merupakan suatu sikap yang menghapus kesalahan terdakwa mengingat dirinya merupakan fasilitator program tersebut. Terdakwa seharusnya lebih teliti dan cermat dalam seluruh proses pengajuan terlebih program pemberian dana hibah menggunakan keuangan negara. Terdakwa dapat dikatakan lalai terhadap tugasnya, sehingga akibat berupa kerugian keuangan negara timbul karena terdakwa lalai untuk melakukan kewajiban-kewajiban yang seharusnya dilakukan oleh terdakwa agar tidak terjadi kerugian negara. Pertimbangan hakim yang menjadikan penentu keluarnya putusan Hakim Pengadilan Tindak Pidana Korupsi di Pengadilan Negeri Surabaya Nomor 133/PID.SUS-TPK/2019/PN SBY dimana terdakwa diputus bebas padahal terdakwa memiliki kesalahan dalam perbuatan tersebut yaitu berupa kealpaan atau kelalaian sehingga akibat berupa kerugian keuangan negara timbul karena terdakwa tidak melakukan kewajiban-kewajibannya sebagai seorang fasilitator. Hakim juga seharusnya melihat urgensi dan prioritas negara dalam memberantas korupsi sehingga menimbulkan kesan dan perasaan agar orang lain tidak akan pernah berani melakukan tindak pidana korupsi, juga memberikan kesan kepada masyarakat bahwa negara ini memang serius dalam menangani kasus korupsi di Indonesia.
Kata kunci : Korupsi, Putusan Hakim, Pertanggungjawaban Pidana
Corruption cases in Indonesia were revealed after the ratification of the Law on the Eradication of Criminal Acts of Corruption, and was successfully tried and sentenced to prison. However, there are some cases that seem to have been regulated in the trial, such as the acquittal for the defendant whose evidence is quite convincing that the defendant is guilty. An example of an acquittal that needs to be investigated is decision Number 133/Pid.Sus-TPK/2019/PN Sby , with the defendant Ratih Retnowati who served as deputy chairman of the Surabaya City Council for the 2014-2019 period. The defendant was implicated in the corruption case of the 2016 Community Aspiration Network (JASMAS) grant. The defendant testified that he was not aware of the existence of 6 (six) proposals outside the defendant's electoral district, it was not an attitude that erased the defendant's guilt considering that he was the facilitator of the program. The defendant should have been more thorough and careful in the entire application process, especially the grant program using state finances. The defendant can be said to be negligent in his duties, so that the consequences in the form of state financial losses arise because the defendant is negligent to carry out the obligations that should be carried out by the defendant so that state losses do not occur. The judges' considerations are the determinants of the decision of the Corruption Court Judge at the Surabaya District Court Number 133/ PID.SUS-TPK/2019/PN SBY where the defendant was acquitted even though the defendant had a mistake in the act, namely in the form of negligence or negligence so that the result in the form of state financial losses arises because the defendant does not carry out his obligations as a facilitator. The judge should also see the urgency and priority of the state in eradicating corruption so that it creates the impression and feeling that other people will never dare to commit a criminal act of corruption, also gives the impression to the public that this country is serious in dealing with corruption cases in Indonesia.
Keywords: Corruption, Judge's Decision, Criminal Liability