Eksistensi Perundang-undangan Anti Korupsi Indonesia dalam Penegakan Hukum terhadap Korporasi Multinasional: Analisis Teori Pilihan Rasional
Nuchraha Alhuda Hasnda, Nuchraha S.H. Alhuda
| Abstract views: 0
| 
views: 0
Abstract
Corruption in Indonesia is governed by Law No. 31 of 1999 on the Eradication of Corruption (UUTPK). However, the criminal liability provisions for foreign corporations or Multinational Corporations (MNCs) remain ambiguous, as the law primarily focuses on individual offenses. The enactment of Law No. 1 of 2023 concerning the Criminal Code (KUHP) has not introduced substantial changes, as it merely codifies existing regulations. Under rational choice theory, MNCs are likely to engage in corrupt practices if the benefits outweigh the risks. This study addresses two key issues: What is the current status of Indonesia’s anti-corruption regime? How is the rational choice theory applied in law enforcement against multinational corporations? The research adopts a normative juridical approach, relying on literature review data. The findings reveal that the weaknesses in the UUTPK create legal loopholes that MNCs can exploit to evade criminal liability. Legislators should differentiate between individual and corporate criminal liability and establish an appropriate legal framework for MNCs. The study proposes the imposition of direct sanctions, such as hefty fines, operational restrictions, or business license revocations, as a way to strengthen law enforcement without the need for additional evidence once public official corruption is proven. These sanctions would function as both deterrents and corrective measures, compelling corporations to be more cautious in decision-making and fostering a more transparent business environment.
Abstrak
Tindak pidana korupsi di Indonesia diatur melalui Undang-Undang Nomor 31 Tahun 1999 tentang Pemberantasan Tindak Pidana Korupsi (UUTPK). ketentuan mengenai tanggung jawab pidana korporasi asing atau Multinational Corporations (MNC) masih belum jelas, karena lebih berfokus pada pelanggaran individu. Kehadiran Undang- Undang Nomor 1 Tahun 2023 tentang KUHP tidak membawa perubahan mendasar, karena bersifat kodifikasi dari peraturan yang sudah ada. Dalam konteks teori pilihan rasional, MNC akan melakukan korupsi jika manfaat yang diperoleh lebih besar daripada risiko yang ditimbulkan. Rumusan masalah yang dibahas meliputi Bagaimana eksistensi rezim anti-korupsi di Indonesia? Bagaimana penerapan teori pilihan rasional dalam penegakan hukum terhadap korporasi multinasional?. Penelitian ini menggunakan metode yuridis normatif dengan sumber data kajian kepustakaan. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa lemahnya pengaturan dalam UUTPK memungkinkan MNC mengeksploitasi celah hukum untuk menghindari berbuat pidana. Legislator perlu untuk mempertimbangkan perbedaan tanggung jawab pidana individu dan korporasi serta mengembangkan kerangka hukum yang sesuai untuk kororasi multinasional. Penerapan sanksi pidana yang langsung, seperti denda besar, pembatasan operasional, atau pencabutan izin usaha, sebagai solusi memperkuat penegakan hukum tanpa perlu pembuktian ulang jika korupsi yang dilakukan pejabat publik terbukti. Sanksi berfungsi sebagai pencegahan dan perbaikan, memaksa korporasi berhati-hati dalam mengambil keputusan dan menciptakan lingkungan bisnis yang lebih transparan.
Keywords
Full Text:
PDFReferences
Akbar, Muhammad Fatahillah. “Penerapan Pertanggungjawaban Pidana Korporasi dalam Berbagai Putusan Pengadilan.” Jurnal Hukum & Pembangunan 51, No. 3 (2021): 805– 820. https://scholarhub.ui.ac.id/jhp/vol51/iss3/15.
Alexander, Cindy R., dan Mark A. Cohen. “The Causes of Corporate Crime: An Economic Perspective.” Dalam Prosecutors in the Boardroom: Using
Criminal Law to Regulate Corporate Conduct, diedit oleh Anthony S. Barkow dan Rachel E. Barkow, 11-35. New York, USA: New York University Press, 2011.
https://doi.org/10.18574/ nyu/9780814787038.003.0002.
Anna-Luise. Multinational Corporations in International Law. KU Leuven Working Paper No. 129, 2013.
Armour, John, Henry Hansmann, Reinier Kraakman, dan Mariana Pargendler. “What Is Corporate Law?” Dalam The Anatomy of Corporate Law, 3rd ed., 1-28. Oxford University Press, 2017.https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198739630.003.0001.
Atmasasmita, Romli. Kapita Selekta Hukum Pidana Internasional. Bandung: Utomo, 2004.
Barkovic Bojanic, Ivana, dan Mira Lulic. Contemporary Legal and Economic Issues III. Rijeka: University of Rijeka, Faculty of Law, 2011.
Beale, Sara Sun. “A Response to the Critics of Corporate Criminal Liability.” American Criminal Law Review 46 (2009): 1482–1500.
Brodowski, Dominik, Manuel Espinoza de los Monteros de la Parra, Klaus
Tiedemann, dan Joachim Vogel, eds. Regulating Corporate Criminal Liability. Springer International Publishing, 2014. https://doi. org/10.1007/978-3-319-05993-8_1.
Boakye Derrick , Daniel Siaw, and David Sarpong. “The Airbus Bribery Scandal: A Collective Myopia Perspective.” European Management Review, Vol. 19, No. 4, 2022, pp. 654– 470. Wiley Online Library, doi:10.1111/emre.12511.
Bucheli, M. The Routledge Companion to the Makers of Global Business. New York: Routledge, 2020.
Castro, A., N. Phillips, dan S. Ansari. “Corporate Corruption: A Review and an Agenda for Future Research.” Academy of Management Annals 14, No. 2 (2020): 938– 965. https://doi.org/10.5465/ annals.2018.0156.
Cavanagh, Neil. “Corporate Criminal Liability: An Assessment of the Models of Fault.” The Journal of Criminal Law75, No. 5 (September 2011): 418–424. https://doi.org/10.1350/ jcla.2011.75.5.729.
Chandrawulan. Hukum Perusahaan Multinasional, Liberalisasi Hukum Perdagangan Internasional dan Hukum Penanaman Modal. Bandung: Alumni, 2011.
De Maglie, Cristina. “Models of Corporate Criminal Liability in Comparative
Law.” Washington University Global Studies Law Review 4 (2005): 547–550.
Diskant, E. B. “Comparative Corporate Criminal Liability: Exploring the
Uniquely American Doctrine through Comparative Criminal Procedure.” The Yale Law Journal 118, No. 1 (2008): 144–175. https://doi.org/10.2307/20454705.
Ferreira, Luciano Vaz, dan Fabio Costa Morosini. “The Implementation of International Anti-Corruption Law in Business: Legal Control of Corruption Directed to Transnational Corporations.” Austral: Brazilian Journal of Strategy & International Relations 2, No. 3 (February 2013): 263- 283.https://doi.org/10.22456/2238- 6912.35615.
Fisse, Brent, dan John Braithwaite. Corporations, Crime and Accountability. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1994.
Garrett, Brandon L. Too Big to Jail: How Prosecutors Compromise with Corporations. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2014. https://doi. org/10.2307/j.ctt9qdskg.
Graycar, Adam. “Corruption: Classification and Analysis.” Policy and Society (2015): 89–101. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. polsoc.2015.04.001.
Hafil, Muhammad. “KPK: 14 Perusahaan Asing Sektor Migas Tak Pernah Bayar Pajak.” Republika. Diakses 11 September 2024. https://nasional.republika.co.id/berita/loay55/kpk- 14-perusahaan-asing-sektor-migas- tak-pernah-bayar-pajak.
Alviarez, Vanessa. “Multinational Production and Comparative
Advantage.” Journal of International Economics 119, No. 1 (Maret 2019): 1-10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. jinteco.2019.03.004.
Hock, Branislav. “Transnational Bribery: When is Extraterritoriality Appropriate?” Charleston Law Review 11, No. 1 (Maret 2017): 305-327.
Jancsics, David. “Interdisciplinary Perspectives on Corruption.” CUNY Graduate Center and Rutgers University- Newark (2014): 360–374. https://doi. org/10.1111/soc4.12146.
Kairupan, David. Aspek Hukum Penanaman Modal Asing di Indonesia. Jakarta:
Kencana, 2014.
Kamil, Irfan, dan Dani Prabowo. “Ini Konstruksi Perkara Korupsi yang Menjerat Mantan Dirut PT Pelindo II RJ Lino.” Kompas, 26 Maret 2021. https://nasional.kompas. com/read/2021/03/26/19273911/ ini-konstruksi-perkara-korupsi-yang- menjerat-mantan-dirut-pt-pelindo- ii-rj.
Komisi Pemberantasan Korupsi (KPK). Publikasi Data KPK.“ Diakses 11 September 2024. https://www.kpk. go.id/id/publikasi-data/statistik/ penindakan-2.
Lord, Nicholas. “Regulating Transnational Corporate Bribery: Anti-Bribery and Corruption in the UK and Germany.” Crime, Law and Social Change 60, no. 2
(May 23, 2013): 129– 145. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10611- 013-9445-y.
Luo, Y. “An Organizational Perspective of Corruption.” Management and Organization Review 1, no. 1 (2005): 120–135. https://doi.org/10.1111/ j.1740-8784.2004.00006.x.
Marciano, A., dan G. Ramello, eds. Encyclopedia of Law and Economics. New York, NY: Springer, 2014. https://doi.org/10.1007/978- 1-4614-7883-6_17-1.
Marzuki, Peter M. Penelitian Hukum. Jakarta: Kencana, 2021.
Mehlkop, Guido, dan Pieter de Graeff. “Modelling a Rational Choice Theory of Criminal Action: Subjective Expected Utilities, Norms, and Interactions.” Rationality and Society (2010): 190–208. https://doi.org/10.1177/1043463110364730.
Minefee, Ishva, dan Marcelo Bucheli. “Com bating Corruption.” Dalam The Routledge Companion to the Makers of Global Business, 516– 529. Abingdon, Oxon; New York, NY: Routledge, 2019. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315277813-38.
Nguyen, Hoang Tien, Ai Ngoc Nhan Le, Hoi Vu Le, dan Khoa Dang Duong. “Foreign Direct Investment and Employment in Asia Pacific Nations: The Moderating Role of Labor Quality.” Heliyon 10, no. 9 (September 2024): 1-12. https://doi. org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e30133.
Nichols, Philip M. “Regulating Transnational Bribery in Times of Globalization and Fragmentation.” Yale Journal of International Law 24, no. 1 (Winter 1999): 1-30.
OECD. Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises. n.d. Rose-Ackerman, Susan. “Corruption in International Business: The Obligations of Multinational Firms.” Zeitschrift Für Wirtschafts- Und Unternehmensethik 19, no. 1 (Maret 2018): 1-15. https://doi. org/10.5771/1439-880x-2018-1-6.
Sampath, Vijay S., Naomi Gardberg, dan Noushi Rahman. “Corporate Reputation’s Invisible Hand: Bribery, Rational Choice, and Market Penalties.” Journal of Business Ethics 151 (2018): 747–767. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-016-3242-3.
Sartor, Michael A., dan Paul W. Beamish. “Private Sector Corruption, Public Sector Corruption and the Organizational Structure of Foreign Subsidiaries.” Journal of Business Ethics 167, no. 3 (2020): 725–
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551- 019-04148-1.
Skandiva, Razananda, dan Beniharmoni Harefa. “Urgensi Penerapan Foreign Bribery dalam Konvensi Antikorupsi di Indonesia.” Integritas: Jurnal Antikorupsi 7 (2022): 245–262.
Stout, Lynn A. Corporate Entities: Their Ownership, Control, and Purpose. Forthcoming, Cornell Legal Studies Research, September 21, 2016. https:// doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2841875.
Suhariyanto, B., C. Mustafa, dan T. Santoso. “Liability Incorporate Between Transnational Corruption Cases: Indonesia and the United States of America.” Journal of Legal, Ethical and Regulatory Issues 24, no. 3 (2021): 1–10.
Suhariyanto, Budi. Liability Incorporate Between Transnational Corruption
Cases Indonesia and The United States of America. Jakarta: Kencana, 2021.
Suteki. Metodologi Penelitian Hukum. Jakarta: Rajawali Pers, 2017.
Thompson, D. F. Two Concepts Of Corruption. Harvard University, Edmond J. Safra Research Lab, 2013. https://doi. org/10.2139/ssrn.2304419.
Vannucci, Alberto. “Three Paradigms for the Analysis of Corruption.” Labour & Law Issues 1 (2015): 18–32. https:// doi.org/10.6092/issn.2421-2695/5468.
Weissmann, Andrew. “Rethinking Criminal Corporate Liability.” Indiana Law Journal 82, No. 5 (2007): 441–475.
Werle, Nicholas. “Prosecuting Corporate Crime When Firms Are Too Big to Jail: Investigation, Deterrence, and Judicial Review.” Yale Law Journal 128 (2018): 1389–1415. https://www.jstor. org/stable/45389492.
Wicipto, S. “Korupsi di Indonesia: Penyebab, Hambatan, Solusi dan Regulasi.” Legislasi Indonesia 15 (2018): 255–268.
Xie, X., G. Qi, dan K. X. Zhu. “Corruption and New Product Innovation: Examining Firms’ Ethical Dilemmas in Transition Economies.” Journal of Business Ethics 160, no. 1 (January 2018): 108–126.https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551- 018-3804-7.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Refbacks
- There are currently no refbacks.
