Publisher

UIAUIA

Journal VERITASVERITAS Abstract

The Corruption Eradication Commission was established due to widespread corruption in Indonesia, leading to the formation of an independent national commission based on Law No. 30 of 2002, which was not part of the executive, legislative, or judicial branches of government. However, the Constitutional Court Decision No. 36/PUU-XV/2017 determined that the KPK is part of the executive branch. Prior to this decision, the KPK was an independent state institution responsible for enforcing and eradicating corruption. In the Indonesian constitutional system, the KPK functions as an auxiliary state institution with the independent function of eradicating corruption. This legal research examines how the KPK maintains its independence as an executive institution, employing a normative legal research method. The research concludes that the KPKs placement within the executive branch compromises its independence due to the risk of intervention, as corruption often occurs within state administration. Therefore, restoring the KPK to its original independent position is crucial to preserving its independence.

Conclusion

The research indicates that the KPKs placement within the executive branch poses a significant challenge to its independence, as it increases the risk of intervention given the prevalence of corruption within state administration.This situation complicates the KPKs ability to effectively carry out its mandate.Consequently, restoring the KPK to its original independent status is essential to safeguard its autonomy and ensure its effectiveness in combating corruption.Maintaining the KPKs independence is vital for upholding its role as a key institution in the fight against corruption in Indonesia.

Future Research

Based on the findings of this research, several avenues for future study emerge. First, a comparative analysis of independent anti-corruption agencies in other countries could provide valuable insights into best practices for safeguarding institutional autonomy. Second, research should investigate the practical implications of the Constitutional Courts decision on the KPKs operational effectiveness and its ability to investigate high-profile corruption cases. Third, further study is needed to explore the potential for strengthening the KPKs internal mechanisms for resisting political interference and ensuring accountability. These research directions could contribute to a more robust and independent KPK, ultimately enhancing Indonesias efforts to combat corruption. Additionally, exploring the impact of the Dewan Pengawas (Supervisory Board) on the KPKs investigative independence warrants further investigation, as does the development of legal frameworks that explicitly protect the KPK from undue influence. Finally, research could focus on public perception of the KPKs independence and the factors that contribute to public trust in the agency.

Metadata

File size	169.88 KB
Pages	10
DMCA	Report