Consistency and Disparity of Verdicts in Corruption Crimes: Comparative Court Decisions on Bribery Cases

Abdul Madjid; Dony Setiawan Putra

doi:10.47268/pamali.v6i2.3769

Authors

Abdul Madjid ✉ Universitas Brawijaya , Indonesia
Dony Setiawan Putra Universitas Brawijaya , Indonesia

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.47268/pamali.v6i2.3769

Keywords:

Corruption, Bribery, Disparity of Court Rulings, Sentencing

Abstract

Introduction: Corruption, particularly bribery, remains a major issue in Indonesia, impacting not only the economy and the country's finances but also undermining public trust in state institutions. Bribery within government creates social inequality and hinders development aimed at achieving a fair and prosperous society. Despite existing regulations aimed at combating corruption, inconsistencies in sanctions and disparities in court decisions remain significant problems.

Purposes of the Research: The purpose of this study is to identify whether the reality of court rulings in bribery cases in 2013 and 2023 reflects the goals outlined in Law Number 20 of 2001 on the eradication of corruption, and to analyze whether there is any disparity in these rulings caused by different judicial considerations.

Methods of the Research: This research employs a normative legal research method, using statute approach, conceptual approach, and analytical approach. The statute approach is used to analyze the legal provisions in Law Number 31 of 1999 as amended by Law Number 20 of 2001, particularly those regulating bribery offenses. The conceptual approach is used to understand the legal concepts of justice and legal certainty in sentencing. The analytical approach is applied to compare court rulings in 2013 and 2023 and identify any potential disparities.

Results Main Findings of the Research: The research reveals that there is a disparity in sentencing for bribery cases, despite the clarity of existing legal provisions. The differences in sentences imposed by judges are influenced by varying judicial considerations, such as the defendant's confession, the return of illicit gains, and the defendant’s role in the case. The study also found that although sentencing guidelines have been implemented, consistency in sentencing needs further improvement. This highlights the importance of enhancing clearer and more structured sentencing guidelines to reduce unwarranted disparities in punishment.

References

Alimuddin, Rodliyah, and Rina Rohayu. “Analisis Disparitas Pemidanaan Terhadap Penyuapan Dalam Tindak Pidana Korupsi.” Private Law 5, no. 2 (2025): 634–50. https://doi.org/10.29303/prlw.v5i2.7585.

Amin, Muhammad Nur. “Disparitas Pemidanaan Tindak Pidana Korupsi Dalam Praktik Pengadilan.” Lex Librum : Jurnal Ilmu Hukum 9, no. 1 (2017). https://doi.org/10.46839/lljih.v9i1.635.

Azalia, Ummu Habibah, Alan Bayu Aji, and Litya Surisdani Anggraeniko. “Disparitas Putusan Hakim Dalam Kasus Korupsi Oleh Pejabat Publik.” Jurnal Hukum In Concreto 2, no. 2 (2023): 141–51. https://doi.org/10.35960/inconcreto.v2i2.1173.

Della, Anesva Sari. Dampak penyalahgunaan Wewenang terhadap praktek suap dalam pengangkatan dan penempatan PPPK. 6 (2024).

Deshaini, Liza, and Muhammad Nur Amin. “Perlawanan Terhadap Perampasan Aset Yang Disita Dalam Perkara Tindak Pidana Korupsi.” Lex Librum : Jurnal Ilmu Hukum 9, no. 2 (2020). https://doi.org/10.46839/lljih.v9i2.767.

Febriana, Adinda, and Viona Salsabila. “Pengaturan Tindak Pidana Korupsi (Suap) Menurut Hukum Pidana Indonesia Dan Hukum Pidana Malaysia.” Datin Law Jurnal 1, no. 1 (2020). https://doi.org/10.36355/dlj.v1i1.335.

Firmansyah, Aidil, Deni Setiawan, Farhan Pratama, et al. “Putusan Pengadilan Sebagai Sumber Hukum Yurispudensi.” Wathan: Jurnal Ilmu Sosial dan Humaniora 1, no. 2 (2024): 136–46. https://doi.org/10.71153/wathan.v1i2.79.

Guslihan, Riza Aldia, Joelman Subaidi, and Teuku Yudi Afrizal. Analisis Putusan Hakim Terhadap Pelaku Tindak Pidana Korupsi Yang Dilakukan Oleh Aparat Penegak. 2025.

Hasibuan, Imelda and Sunariyo. “Analisis Yuridis Perbuatan Penyuapan Dalam Tindak Pidana Korupsi.” The Juris 7, no. 2 (2023): 445–52. https://doi.org/10.56301/juris.v7i2.1051.

Lalitasari, Ajeng Arindita. Disparitas Pidana Putusan Hakim Dalam Kasus Korupsi Yang Dilakukan Secara Bersama-Sama Di Pengadilan Negeri Tindak Pidana Korupsi Semarang. 8 (2019).

Maulidya, Ghoniyah Zulindah, Syahdila Nur Rahmawati, Vina Rahmawati, and Alifian Fahdzan Mardany. “Ratio Decidendi Putusan, Jenis-Jenis Putusan dan Upaya Hukum Terhadap Putusan yang Telah Memiliki Kekuatan Hukum Tetap Ditinjau dari Perspektif Hukum Acara Pidana di Indonesia.” HUKMY: Jurnal Hukum 3, no. 1 (2023): 211–30. https://doi.org/10.35316/hukmy.2023.v3i1.211-230.

Mitchell, Matthew. “Analyzing the Law Qualitatively.” Qualitative Research Journal 23, no. 1 (2022): 102–13. https://doi.org/10.1108/QRJ-04-2022-0061.

Mulyadi, Lilik. “Pusat Dokumentasi & Referensi Hukum Fakultas Hukum Universitas Indonesia.” Accessed February 6, 2026. https://dev.law.ui.ac.id/koleksi/detail/63/hukum-acara-pidana-suatu-tinjauan-khusus-terhadap-surat-dakwaan-eksepsi-dan-putusan-peradilanlilik-mulyadi-sh-mh.

Narayana, Suwandi, Budi Bahreisy, and Zainal Abidin. Analisis Putusan Pengadilan Terhadap Pelaku Penyuap Bupati Dalamkasus Proyek Pemerintah. 8, no. 3 (2025).

Rohman, Moh. Mujibur, Nashrul Mu’minin, Mowafg Masuwd, and Elihami Elihami. “Methodological Reasoning Finds Law Using Normative Studies (Theory, Approach and Analysis of Legal Materials).” MAQASIDI: Jurnal Syariah Dan Hukum, December 27, 2024, 204–21. https://doi.org/10.47498/maqasidi.v4i2.3379.

Siahaan, Eko, Herlina Manullang, and July Esther. “Analisis Putusan Hakim Terhadap Tindak Pidana Korupsi Yang Dilakukan Dengan Berbarengan (Studi Putusan Nomor: 5/Pid.Sus-TPK/2021/PN.Mdn).” Nommensen Journal of Legal Opinion, January 17, 2024, 61–74. https://doi.org/10.51622/njlo.v5i1.878.

Sukma, Ryan Chandra, and Rosalia Dika Agustanti. Disparitas Putusan Hakim Terhadap Pelaku Tindak Pidana Ujaran Kebencian Yang Dilakukan Oleh Masyarakat Umum. 5, no. 1 (2023).

Theresia, Yohana Maria, Markoni Markoni, and Nardiman Nardiman. “Disparitas Hukuman Perkara Tindak Pidana Korupsi Dan Pedoman Pemidanaan Tindak Pidana Korupsi Oleh Mahkamah Agung.” Syntax Literate; Jurnal Ilmiah Indonesia 9, no. 2 (2024): 719–27. https://doi.org/10.36418/syntax-literate.v9i2.15210.

Wildan Tantowi, N.G.A.N Ajeng Saraswati, and Viola Sekarayu Gayatri. “Problematika Kebijakan Penegakan Hukuman Pidana Mati Untuk Koruptor Pada Masa Pandemi Corona Virus Disease 2019 (Covid-19).” UIR Law Review 5, no. 1 (2021): 49–58. https://doi.org/10.25299/uirlrev.2021.vol5(1).6123.

Zuhrah, Adi Sulistiyono, Ridwan, Syamsuddin, and Iksan. “Independensi Hakim dalam Berbagai Disparitas Putusan Perkara Korupsi di Mahkamah Agung.” Fundamental: Jurnal Ilmiah Hukum 13, no. 1 (2024): 47–70. https://doi.org/10.34304/jf.v13i1.236.