Reconstructing State Economic Loss Calculation in Corporate Corruption Adjudication
Main Article Content
Anastasia Rentama Sijabat*
Indonesian anti-corruption adjudication continues to grapple with inconsistent quantification of state financial loss in corporate corruption cases. This study examined two recent cassation rulings of the Indonesian Supreme Court involving the palm oil industry and analyzed them against two 2026 rulings of the Constitutional Court that reaffirmed the exclusive declaring authority of the Supreme Audit Agency and entrenched the actual loss principle. Using a normative juridical design, the analysis combined statute, case, and conceptual approaches, complemented by comparative insights from the French Sapin II framework and the Spanish recovery model. The evidence indicated a methodological disorientation, namely that the same court relied on a proceeds-oriented calculus in one ruling and a loss-oriented calculus in another, even though the underlying fact patterns were materially comparable. This oscillation has eroded legal certainty and weakened the deterrent function of corporate criminal liability. To address this and to harmonize practice with the new constitutional jurisprudence, the discussion proposed an Integrated Economic and Ecological Audit Standard, configured as a three-layer architecture in which the Supreme Audit Agency declares, supporting institutions supply technical valuations, and the trial court independently validates. Five components, comprising unlawful gain, direct fiscal loss, ecological recovery cost, downstream economic loss, and social cost, are reframed as quantifiable financial figures within the broader umbrella of state economic loss. The findings suggested that consistent adoption of this architecture could systematize judicial reasoning, improve recovery rates, and tighten corporate accountability, offering practitioners and lawmakers a coherent doctrinal template.
Akhbari, R., & Nejati, M. (2019). The Effect of Corruption on Carbon Emissions in Developed and Developing Countries: Empirical Investigation of a Claim. Heliyon, 5(9), e02516. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2019.e02516
Aqilah, S. F. (2025). Analisis Yuridis Kasus Korupsi dan Pencucian Uang PT Duta Palma Group dalam Perspektif Hukum Dagang Indonesia. Causa: Jurnal Hukum Dan Kewarganegaraan, 15(5), 131–140. https://doi.org/10.6679/btszr219
Atmasasmita, R. (2018). Pengantar Hukum Kejahatan Bisnis. Prenadamedia Group.
Deng, J. (2018). The National Supervision Commission: A New Anti-corruption Model in China. International Journal of Law, Crime and Justice, 52, 58–73. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijlcj.2017.09.005
Fernando, Z. J., Illahi, B. K., Putra, Y. S., & Gusri, I. (2023). Deep Anti-Corruption Blueprint for the Mining, Mineral, and Coal Sector in Indonesia. Cogent Social Sciences, 9(1), 2187737. https://doi.org/10.1080/23311886.2023.2187737
Fernando, Z. J., Pujiyono, P., Susetyo, H., Candra, S., & Putra, P. S. (2022). Preventing Bribery in the Private Sector Through Legal Reform Based on Pancasila. Cogent Social Sciences, 8(1), 2103944. https://doi.org/10.1080/23311886.2022.2138906
Fuady, M. (2014). Doktrin-Doktrin Modern dalam Corporate Law & Eksistensinya dalam Hukum Indonesia. Citra Aditya Bakti.
González Uriel, D. (2021). Money Laundering, Political Corruption and Asset Recovery in the Spanish Criminal Code. International Annals of Criminology, 59(1), 38–54. https://doi.org/10.1017/cri.2021.5
Hafrida, H., Kusniati, R., & Monita, Y. (2022). Imprisonment as a Criminal Sanction against Corporations in Forestry Crimes: How Is It Possible? Hasanuddin Law Review, 8(2), 160–170. https://doi.org/10.20956/halrev.v8i2.3187
Hartati, Hafrida, Erwin, Arizyanto, R., & Saputra, B. (2024). Authority for Calculating State Economic Losses in Criminal Acts of Corruption in Indonesia. Jurnal IUS Kajian Hukum Dan Keadilan, 12(3), 530–541. https://doi.org/10.29303/ius.v12i3.1480
Hiariej, E. O. S. (2019). United Nations Convention Against Corruption Dalam Sistem Hukum Indonesia. OLD WEBSITE OF JURNAL MIMBAR HUKUM, 31(1), 112–125. https://doi.org/10.22146/jmh.43968
Karianga, H. (2024). State Financial Corruption and its Impact on Development. Revista de Gestão Social e Ambiental, 18(9), e05133. https://doi.org/10.24857/rgsa.v18n9-027
Komalasari, R., & Mustafa, C. (2024). Strengthening Asset Recovery Efforts: A Path to Mitigating Corruption in the Public Sector. Integritas: Jurnal Antikorupsi, 10(1), 137–148. https://doi.org/10.32697/integritas.v10i1.1042
Mahmud, A. (2018). Problematika Asset Recovery dalam Pengembalian Kerugian Negara Akibat Tindak Pidana Korupsi. Jurnal Yudisial, 11(3), 347–366. https://doi.org/10.29123/jy.v11i3.262
Nelson, F. M. (2022). In Search of a Deferred Prosecution Agreement Model for Effective Anti-Corruption Framework in Indonesia. Hasanuddin Law Review, 8(2), 122–138. https://doi.org/10.20956/halrev.v8i2.3292
Prayudha, Y. W. (2025). Legal Protection for Victims of Illegal Investment through Loss Recovery. Policy Law Notary and Regulatory Issues (POLRI), 4(4), 672–688. https://doi.org/10.55047/polri.v4i4.1912
Saputera, J. A., Naiborhu, M. I., Budiman, E., Widjaja, L., & Sudrajat, M. (2025). Rekonstruksi Pertanggungjawaban Pidana Korporasi dalam KUHP Nasional: Telaah Kritis atas Undang-Undang Nomor 1 Tahun 2023 dalam Perspektif Hukum Pidana Modern. The Juris, 9(2), 388–394. https://doi.org/10.56301/juris.v9i2.1750
Saragih, E. P. H., Akub, M. S., Halim, H., Halim, H., & Ilyas, A. (2024). Efforts of The Prosecutor as State Attorney to Recovery Recovery of State Losses Through Replacement Money. Revista de Gestão Social e Ambiental, 18(6), e05567. https://doi.org/10.24857/rgsa.v18n6-079
Setiawati, A. D., & Vitrana, M. G. (2025). Doktrin Business Judgment Rule dalam UU BUMN: Batas Tanggung Jawab Direksi dalam Tindak Pidana Korupsi. JURNAL RECHTENS, 14(1), 155–170. https://doi.org/10.56013/rechtens.v14i1.4256
Sjawie, H. F. (2018). Pertanggungjawaban Pidana Korporasi pada TIPIKOR. Kencana.
Suhariyanto, B. (2018). Penerapan Pidana Uang Pengganti kepada Korporasi dalam Perkara Korupsi demi Pemulihan Kerugian Keuangan Negara. Jurnal Rechts Vinding: Media Pembinaan Hukum Nasional, 7(1), 113–130. https://doi.org/10.33331/rechtsvinding.v7i1.213
Sundström, A., Harring, N., Jagers, S. C., & Povitkina, M. (2026). The Impact of Corruption on Climate Change Mitigation: A Review Article. Environmental Politics, 1–25. https://doi.org/10.1080/09644016.2026.2621602
Tang, Y. (2024). Nexus of Natural Resource Depletion, Corruption, and Financial Inclusion on Biodiversity Loss: A Systematic Study on Corrupt Economies. Resources Policy, 92, 104967. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resourpol.2024.104967
Tuanakotta, T. M. (2023). Menghitung Kerugian Keuangan Negara dalam Tindak Pidana Korupsi. Penerbit Salemba.
Wibisana, A. G., & Dewaranu, T. A. (2017). Environmental Damage and Liability in Indonesia: Fancy Words Under Conventional Wisdom. In Law and Justice in a Globalized World (pp. 221–228). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.9774/gleaf.9781315223292_30
Zaki, M., Y Chandra, T., & Adianto Mau, H. (2022). The Problem of Corruption Law Enforcement That Causes State Losses Since The Constitutional Court of The Republic of Indonesia Number 25/PUU-XIV/2016 Decision. POLICY, LAW, NOTARY AND REGULATORY ISSUES (POLRI), 1(3). https://doi.org/10.55047/polri.v1i3.204
