Implementation Imprisonment Penalty as Subsidiary of Fine Penalty: Inconsistency of State Financial Losses

APA 6th edition
In-text: (Sianturi & Tanjung, 2017)
Your Bibliography: Sianturi, R.H. & Tanjung, A.F. (2017). Implementation Imprisonment Penalty as Subsidiary of Fine Penalty: Inconsistency of State Financial Losses. International Journal of Environmental and Science Education, 12(7), 1633-1640.

Harvard
In-text: (Sianturi and Tanjung, 2017)
Your Bibliography: Sianturi, R. and Tanjung, A. (2017). Implementation Imprisonment Penalty as Subsidiary of Fine Penalty: Inconsistency of State Financial Losses. International Journal of Environmental and Science Education, 12(7), pp. 1633-1640.

Chicago 16th edition
In-text: (Sianturi and Tanjung 2017)
Your Bibliography: Sianturi, Ronald Hasudungan and Ahmad Feri Tanjung (2017). "Implementation Imprisonment Penalty as Subsidiary of Fine Penalty: Inconsistency of State Financial Losses". International Journal of Environmental and Science Education 12 (7):1633-1640.

Abstract

The Supreme Court has issued Supreme Court Regulation No. 5 Year 2014 as guidance on fine penalty and imprisonment. This study aims to evaluate the consistency of imprisonment penalty as replacement penalty after the issuance of Indonesia Supreme Court Regulation Number 5 Year 2014 on Fine Penalty as Additional Penalty in Corruption. This research is normative juridical research with cases approach. The data used in the 140 verdicts of the district court in the period January - December 2015. The results show the district court verdicts are inconsistent in converting fines into imprisonment because The Indonesia Supreme Court Indonesia has no regulation or parameters to convert it. Unavailable regulation or parameters makes an obstacle in the effort to return the state financial losses.

Keywords: corruption, fine, imprisonment, penalty, replacement, Indonesia

References

Arief, B. N. (2011). Bunga Rampai Kebijakan Hukum Pidana: (Perkembangan Penyusunan Konsep KUHP Baru). Jakarta: Kencana.

Fauzan, H.M. (2013).Peranan Perma dan Sema Sebagai Pengisi Kekosongan Hukum Indonesia Menuju Terwujudnya Peradilan yang Agung. Jakarta: Kencana.

Gunarto, M. P. (2009). Sikap Memidana yang Berorientasi pada Tujuan Pemidanaan. Jurnal Mimbar Hukum, 21(1), 93-108.

Gunawan, T. J. (2015). Konsep Pemidanaan Berbasis Nilai Kerugian Ekonomi. Yogyakarta: Genta.

Hamzah, A. (1987a).Undang-Undang Hukum Pidana Argentina Sebagai Perbandingan. Jakarta: Ghalia Indonesia.

Hamzah, A. (1987b).Undang-Undang Hukum Pidana Austria, Sebagai Perbandingan. Jakarta: Ghalia Indonesia.

Indonesia, Indonesian Constitution 1945. (1945). Direct access:http://www.ilo.org/wcmsp5/groups/public/---ed_protect/---protrav/---ilo_aids/documents/legaldocument/wcms_174556.pdf

Indonesia, Law Number 8 Year 1999 Concerning Consumer Protection. (1999). Direct access:http://www.bu.edu/bucflp/files/2012/01/Law-No.-8-Concerning-Consumer-Protection.pdf

Indonesia, Law Number 31 Year 1999 Concerning Eradication of Corruption. (1999). Direct access:http://publicofficialsfinancialdisclosure.worldbank.org/sites/fdl/files/assets/law-library-files/Indonesia_Corruption%20Eradication%20Law_1999_en.pdf

Indonesia, Law Number 32 Year 2009 Concerning Environmental Management. (2009). Direct access:www.apbi-icma.org/wp.../02/UU-No.-32-Tahun-2009.pdf

Indonesia, Law Number 11 Year 2012 Concerning Child Criminal Justice System. (2012). Direct access:http://www.ilo.org/dyn/natlex/natlex4.detail?p_lang=en&p_isn=91044&p_country=IDN&p_count=611

Indonesia, Law Number 21 Year 2014 Concerning Geothermal. (2014). http://www.elexica.com/en/legal-topics/projects/29-indonesia-relaxes-regulation-of-the-geothermal-market

Indonesia, The Supreme Court Regulation Number 5 Year 2014. (2014).Concerning Additional Fine Penalty In Corruption. Direct access: http://www.abnrlaw.com/news_detail.php?send_n-ews_id=290&year=2017

Lamintang, P.A.&Lamintang, T. (2012).Hukum Penitensier Indonesia. Jakarta: Sinar Grafika.

Loqman, L. (2002).HAM dalam HAP. Jakarta: Datacom.

Muladi, A.&Arief, B. N. (1998).Teori-Teori dan Kebijakan Pidana. Bandung: Alumni.

Nababan, H. (2015). Hukum Tanpa Takaran, Penjara Korupsi Bagi Korban Penipuan. Jakarta: Q Communication.

Rutkowski, C. P. (2017). Fogel's Justice Model: Will Illinois accept it?Direct access: http://www.lib.niu.edu/1976/ii760318.html

Surihaiyono, A.R. (2012).Pembaruan Pidana Denda di Indonesia, Pidana Denda Sebagai Sanksi Alternatif. Jakarta: Papas Sinar Sinanti.

The Judicial Commission of the Republic of Indonesia. (2014). Disparitas Putusan Hakim, Identifikasi dan Implikasi. Jakarta: Sekretariat Jenderal Komisi Yudisial Republik Indonesia.

The Supreme Court of the Republic of Indonesia. (2015). Reviu Rencana Strategis (Renstra) Mahkamah Agung RI 2015-2019. Jakarta: Mahkamah Agung.

Watimena, R.A.(2012).Filsafat Anti Korupsi. Yogyakarta: Kanisius.