The Doctrine of Participation in Abuse of Authority Offenses: Toward Proportional Sentencing in Indonesia's Anti-Corruption Law

Authors

  • Ali Tamrin Wasolo Department of Law, Universitas Darussalam Ambon, Ambon, Indonesia
  • Emy Ollong Department of Law, Universitas Darussalam Ambon, Ambon, Indonesia
  • Rukiah Latuconsina Department of Law, Universitas Darussalam Ambon, Ambon, Indonesia
  • Patma Toisuta Department of Law, Universitas Darussalam Ambon, Ambon, Indonesia
  • Zainuddin Department of Law, Universitas Darussalam Ambon, Ambon, Indonesia

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.55681/ijssh.v4i2.2972

Keywords:

The Teachings of Participation, Abuse of Authority, Criminal Acts of Corruption

Abstract

This study examines the application of the doctrine of participation (deelneming) to acts of abuse of authority as stipulated in Article 3 of Law Number 31 of 1999 in conjunction with Law Number 20 of 2001 concerning the Eradication of Corruption Crimes. The research addresses the problem of whether the doctrine of participation can be applied to abuse of authority offenses, particularly given the differing qualities and authorities among actors in corruption cases. Using a normative juridical method with philosophical, statutory, conceptual, and case approaches, this study analyzes primary and secondary legal materials through qualitative and comprehensive analysis. The findings reveal that courts often fail to distinguish between principal perpetrators and participants in corruption cases, treating all actors equally despite their differing roles and authorities. The research demonstrates that the application of participation doctrine in corruption offenses requires consideration of each actor's authority, whether obtained through attribution, delegation, or mandate. The study concludes that the doctrine of participation can be applied to abuse of authority offenses by distinguishing between principal perpetrators and participants based on their respective roles and legal authority, thereby enabling proportional sentencing that reflects the degree of culpability of each actor.

References

Ali, Z. (2021). Metode Penelitian Hukum. In Sinar Grafika.

Amalia, M., Rays, H. M. I. khwa., Hosnah, A. ul., & Fajrina, R. M. (2024). Asas-Asas Hukum Pidana. In Sonpedia Publishing Indonesia.

Anggraini, D., Pujawan, I. N., & Niniet, I. A. (2011). Optimasi Konfigurasi Jaringan Supply Chain Hulu Gas Lpg 3 Kg Di Indonesia. Semantic Scholar. www.esdm.go.id

Angraeni, N., Bunga, D., Citranu, C., & Aris, A. rdiyanti. (2024). Hukum Pidana: Teori Komprehensif. In PT. Sonpedia Publishing Indonesia.

De Jong, F. (1988). Handboek van het Nederlandse strafrecht – 1935. Juristen Die Schreven En Bleven, 21(2), 205-210.

Fauzi, M. Y., & Jainah, Z. O. (2022). Analisis Pertangung Jawaban Pidana Terhadap Percobaan Pencurian Dengan Pemberatan. 23(1), 95–118.

Jawa, D., Malau, P., & Ciptono, C. (2024). Tantangan Dalam Penegakan Hukum Tindak Pidana Korupsi Di Indonesia Corruption Criminal Law Enforcement Challenges in Indonesia Nilai Indeks Persepsi Korupsi Indonesia tertinggi di Asia Tenggara . Ini berbeda. Jurnal USM Law Review, 7(2), 6–7. https://doi.org/doi.org/10.26623/julr.v7i2.9507

Kila, F., Sugiartha, I. N. G., & Ujianti, N. M. P. (2023). Pertanggungjawaban Pidana Tanpa Sifat Melawan Hukum dalam Perspektif Pembaharuan Hukum Pidana. Jurnal Konstruksi Hukum, 4(1), 28–34. https://doi.org/doi.org/10.22225/jkh.4.1.6027.28-34

Kumalaningdyah, N. (2019). Pertentangan Antara Diskresi Kebijakan Dengan Penyalahgunaan Wewenang Dalam Tindak Pidana Korupsi. Jurnal Hukum Ius Quia Iustum, 26(3), 481–498. https://doi.org/10.20885/iustum.vol26.iss3.art3

Marzuki, H. M. L. (2017). Menyoal Diskresi yang Terpasung (Mengkritisi Undang- Undang Administrasi Pemerintahan. Amanna Gappa, 25(2), 2–7.

Nurhayati, Y., Ifrani, I., & Said, M. Y. (2021). Metodologi Normatif Dan Empiris Dalam Perspektif Ilmu Hukum. Jurnal Penegakan Hukum Indonesia (JPHI), 1–20. https://doi.org/doi.org/10.51749/jphi.v2i1.14

Pattiasina, T. (2021). Divonis 6 Tahun Adrianus Sihasale Ajukan Banding. Ambon.Tribunnews.

Pietersz, J. J. (2017). Prinsip Good Governance Dalam Penyalahgunaan Wewenang. Jurmal Sasi, 23(2), 167–188. https://doi.org/doi.org/10.47268/sasi.v23i2.107

Ponglabba, C. S. R. (2017). Tinjauan Yuridis Penyertaan Dalam Tindak Pidana Menurut KUHP. Lex Crimen Vol., VI(6), 31–37.

Pratiwi, S. (2022). Delik Penyertaan Dalam Kitab Undang-Undang Hukum Pidana ( KUHP ). Binamulia Hukum, 11(1), 69–80. https://doi.org/10.37893/jbh.v11i1.677

Purba, D. A., Hartono, M. S., & Setianto, M. J. (2023). Analisis Yuridis Putusan Hakim Dalam Penerapan Ketentuan Pasal Penyertaan Pada Perkara Tindak Pidana Korupsi (Studi Putusan Nomor 23/Pid.Sus-TPK/2018/PNSrg) Devica. Jurnal Gender Dan Hak Asasi Manusia, 1, 142–155.

Putra, V., Danil, E., & Zurnetti, A. (2023). Pertanggungjawaban Pidana Terhadap Pelaku Tindak Pidana Korupsi Yang Dilakukan Oleh Banyak Orang Pada Kasus Putusan Nomor 6/Pid.Sus.TPK/2023/PT.Pdg Vananda. Unes Law Review, 6(1), 3092–3106. https://doi.org/doi.org/10.31933/unesrev.v6i1.1100

Putusan Pengadilan Negeri Jakarta Selatan, No.2068/Pid.B/2005/PN.Jaksel (2005).

Rizkyta, A. P., & Ningsih, B. R. (2023). Penyalahgunaan Wewenang Berdasarkan Pengadilan Tata Usaha Negara Dan Pengadilan Tindak Pidana Korupsi. Jurnal Esensi Hukum, 4(2), 131–138. https://doi.org/doi.org/10.35586/esensihukum.v4i2.161

Roziwan, R., P, S. E., & Satria, I. (2022). Pertanggungjawaban Pelaku Tindak Pidana Turut Melakukan Penggelapan Karena Adanya Hubungan Kerja. Jurnal Hukum Dan Etika Kesehatan, 2(2), 108–119. https://doi.org/oi.org/10.30649/jhek.v2i2.33

Santiago, F. (2017). Penegakan Hukum Tindak Pidana Korupsi oleh Penegak Hukum untuk Terciptanya Ketertiban Hukum. PAGARUYUANG Law Journal, 1(1), 23–43. https://doi.org/doi.org/10.31869/plj.v1i1.268

Sondakh, D. K. G. (2009). Tanggung Jawab Pidana Individu Bagi Pelaku Pelanggaran Terhadap Hak Asasi Manusia Dalam Rangka Pembaruan Hukum Nasional. Universitas Hasanuddin, Makassar.

Stolwijk, S. (2009). Inleiding in Het Strafrecht in 13 Hoofdstukken. In Deventer Kluwer.

Suhariyanto, B. (2018). Persinggungan Kewenangan Mengadili Penyalahgunaan Diskresi Antara Pengadilan Tun dan Pengadilan Tipikor. Jurnal Hukum Dan Peradilan, 7(2), 213–236. https://doi.org/doi:10.25216/JHP.7.2.2018.213-236

Susiana, P. (2025). Enyalahgunaan Diskresi Pejabat Pemerintahan Sebagai Objek Sengketa Di Pengadilan Tata Usaha Negara. Magistra Vitae: Journal Magister Hukum, 1(2), 56–69.

Downloads

Published

2026-06-30

How to Cite

Tamrin Wasolo, A., Ollong, E., Latuconsina, R., Toisuta, P., & Zainuddin, Z. (2026). The Doctrine of Participation in Abuse of Authority Offenses: Toward Proportional Sentencing in Indonesia’s Anti-Corruption Law. International Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities, 4(2), 996–1013. https://doi.org/10.55681/ijssh.v4i2.2972