Penerapan Hukum Kewenangan Audit Hukum Jaksa Pengacara Negara (JPN) Terkait Kesalahan Administrasi yang Berpotensi Merugikan Keuangan Negara

Saka Andriyansa; Moh. Muhlisin; Dominikus Rato; Y.A.Triana Ohoiwutun

doi:10.62383/presidensial.v2i4.1288

Authors

Saka Andriyansa Universitas Jember
Moh. Muhlisin Universitas Jember
Dominikus Rato Universitas Jember
Y.A.Triana Ohoiwutun Universitas Jember

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.62383/presidensial.v2i4.1288

Keywords:

Administrative Errors, Financial Recovery, Legal Audit, State Attorney (JPN), State Financial Losses

Abstract

Law enforcement in the context of recovering state finances does not solely focus on corruption offenses, but also on administrative errors that may potentially cause losses to the state. The State Attorney (Jaksa Pengacara Negara/JPN) holds strategic authority through legal audits to identify, assess, and provide recommendations regarding potential state financial losses arising from administrative actions inconsistent with applicable regulations. This research formulates two main issues: first, how the legal authority of JPN is applied in conducting legal audits on administrative errors potentially causing state financial losses; second, what legal mechanisms are employed by JPN in conducting legal audits on such administrative errors. The findings of this study indicate that the implementation of legal authority by JPN through legal audits aims to ensure that every aspect of authority, procedure, and substance in governmental decision-making, as well as in the procurement of goods and services, complies with legal provisions, starting from the needs identification stage up to the final handover of work results. This is essential for JPN to accurately determine administrative errors that may potentially cause state financial losses and to formulate them in a legal audit report. The mechanism for resolving legal audit findings is carried out through coordination between JPN and the Government Internal Supervisory Apparatus (APIP) to determine the amount of potential losses. Subsequently, JPN provides recommendations to the applicant to return the potential losses to the state or regional treasury.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Abdul Wahab. (2023). Pelaksanaan hubungan kerjasama antara Aparat Pengawasan Intern Pemerintah (APIP) dengan Aparat Penegak Hukum (APH) dalam perhitungan kerugian keuangan negara/daerah. Jurnal de Facto, 9(2). https://doi.org/10.37159/kh.v9i1.39

Ade, P. L. (2010). Efektivitas pidana pembayaran uang pengganti dalam tindak pidana korupsi (studi putusan tindak pidana korupsi di Pengadilan Negeri Purwokerto). Jurnal Dinamika Hukum, 10(2). https://doi.org/10.20884/1.jdh.2010.10.2.142

Cahyani, E. (2022). Pencegahan tindak pidana korupsi pengadaan barang dan jasa pemerintah. Indonesian Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology (IJCLC), 3(2). https://doi.org/10.18196/ijclc.v3i2.15527

Garcia, J. (2018). International measures to fight money laundering. Journal of Money Laundering, 4(3). https://doi.org/10.1108/eb027209

Gilmore, W. C. (2021). Money laundering: The international aspect. Hume Papers on Public Policy, 1(2). https://doi.org/10.1515/9781474470605-003

Husein, Y. (2021). National and international cooperation in the prevention and eradication of money laundering. Indonesian Journal of International Law, 7(1). https://doi.org/10.17304/ijil.vol7.1.225

Knecht, F. J. (2019). Extraterritorial jurisdiction and the federal money laundering offence. Stanford Journal of International Law, 22.

Kumar, V. A. (2012). Money laundering: Concept, significance and its impact. European Journal of Business and Management, 4(2).

Manao, F. (2018). Penyelesaian penyalahgunaan wewenang oleh aparatur pemerintah dari segi hukum administrasi dihubungkan dengan tindak pidana korupsi. Jurnal Wawasan Yuridika, 2(1). https://doi.org/10.25072/jwy.v2i1.158

Marzuki, P. M. (2011). Penelitian hukum. Kencana Prenada Media Group.

Morais, H. V. (2020). Fighting international crime and its financing: The importance of following a coherent global strategy based on the rule of law. Vilanova Law Review, 50.

Mustamu, J. (2011). Diskresi dan tanggung jawab administrasi pemerintahan. Jurnal Sasi, 17(2). https://doi.org/10.47268/sasi.v17i2.349

Naibaho, P. Y. A., Purwoto, & Pujiyono. (2016). Kebijakan hukum pidana dalam upaya meningkatkan peran serta masyarakat dalam pencegahan dan pemberantasan tindak pidana korupsi. Diponegoro Law Journal, 5(4).

Parker, W. (2022). Black/parallel markets: When is a money exchange a money laundering? Dickinson Journal of International Law, 13.

Pieth, M. (2019). The harmonization of law against economic crime. European Journal of Law Reform, 1(4).

Rambey, G. (2016). Pengembalian kerugian negara dalam tindak pidana korupsi melalui pembayaran uang pengganti dan denda. Jurnal De Lega Lata, 1(1). https://doi.org/10.31219/osf.io/k4fvd_v1

Rustam. (2017). Pelaksanaan pengembalian kerugian keuangan negara (asset recovery) dalam tindak pidana korupsi: Studi kasus Kejaksaan Tinggi Sumatera Barat. Jurnal Dimensi, 6(2). https://doi.org/10.33373/dms.v6i2.1047

Sudira, I. K. (2021). The construction of penal mediation model in handling family neglect cases in the future. International Journal of Education and Research, 2(8).

Wahyuningsih, S. E., & Hafidz, J. (2017). The development of the Indonesia criminal code derived from the judicial pardon value in Islamic law. Jurnal Addin, 11(2). https://doi.org/10.21043/addin.v11i2.2475