DESIGNING AND CONSTRUCTING THE RETURN OF STATE FINANCIAL IN CORRUPTION CASES: A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF LEGAL SYSTEMS
This study aims to examine and analyze the ratio legis regarding replacement money arrangements for convicted corruption cases from a restorative justice perspective. It is a normative study with conceptual, case, and comparative approaches. The results show that the ratio legis in the regulation of replacement money in lieu of corruption convicts is an effort to recover financial losses suffered by the State due to corruption. An ideal sanction against convicted corruption cases in the context of recovering state losses is more related to the principle of restorative justice, namely focusing on efforts to recover losses suffered by the State by prioritizing sanctions for payment of replacement money for the actions of perpetrators whose qualifications are directly detrimental to state finances. The sanction for payment of replacement money is then balanced with imprisonment or fines according to the capabilities of the act committed. The Plea Bargaining and Deferred Prosecution Agreement in the corruption criminal justice system can be adopted as a means for suspects to obtain reduced sentences (prison and/or fines) if they admit the act.
Corruption; Fines; Restorative Justice; State Financial Losses