Function Intelligence The District Attorney's Office in Revealing Action Criminal Corruption

Abstract

This study aims to analyze the role and function of the Pinrang District Prosecutor's Intelligence in disclosing criminal acts of corruption and identifying the obstacles faced in this process. The approach used is an empirical approach with data collection methods through interviews and literature study. Interviews were conducted with the Head of the Intelligence Section, members of the Intel Prosecutor, as well as practicing legal advocates who have in-depth knowledge and understanding regarding the disclosure of criminal acts of corruption and the legal processes that apply in Indonesia. The literature study was carried out by studying relevant laws and regulations as well as other scientific works that discuss the role of the District Attorney's intelligence in disclosing criminal acts of corruption. The research results show that the disclosure process begins with public reports or internal findings received and continues with data collection and exposure involving the Head of the District Attorney's Office, Head of the Intelligence Section, and Head of the Special Crimes Section to determine the feasibility of the investigation. Obstacles faced include limited budget, facilities, and external pressure from certain parties. Therefore, it is necessary to increase the budget and supporting facilities as well as protection for investigators so that the law enforcement process runs optimally. To increase the effectiveness of disclosing corruption cases, it is recommended that there be an additional budget, facilitation of a team of experts, better coordination between institutions, as well as increased transparency and education for the public. The prosecutor's office is also expected to increase the training and capacity of officers to overcome challenges in disclosing criminal acts of corruption in accordance with applicable legal procedures.

INTRODUCTION

Indonesia is a country based on law , as in a way firm stated in Article 1 paragraph (3) of the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia (UUD NRI 1945) which states that "The State of Indonesia is a state based on law ." Where the State of Indonesia is based on law on the law of “ rechtaat ”, no based on power merely " machstaat ". [1] So it is clear that the mandated objectives of the rule of law in the 1945 Constitution not just a country based on it law arbitrary . The law that is expected is not the law that was formed only based on power , which can culminating in power absolute or authoritarian . Such laws That no fair , because No based on the principle justice for the people. [2]

Dynamics problem social Keep going growing and growing increase from day to day , so that become something very disturbing as well as worrying . [3] One of the problem social up to moment This Not yet completed and still become not quite enough answer big together is behavior corruption . [4] The role of intelligence prosecutor's office in to reveal act criminal corruption is very important , but faced with various challenge in effort reach optimal results . Currently , the Pinrang District Attorney's Office has take step significant in eradication corruption in its territory , as in the case of suspicion corruption committed by the Director of PT Pinrang Sejahtera, initials MAA, related to management of the Pinrang Mall Building . [5] In the case of this , MAA is set as suspect on suspicion abuse authority that causes state losses of up to Rp. 1 billion . [6] This case reflect the existence of a modus operandi in management complex state assets , so need accuracy as well as skills intelligence prosecutor's office in uncover and follow up deviations that occur . [7] However Thus , success in disclosure cases like This faced with various limitations source the power possessed by the Pinrang District Attorney's Office . [ 8] Challenge main issues faced is limitations amount personnel and sophistication equipment or the technology required For support operation intelligence . [9] The perpetrator's modus operandi increasing corruption​ sophisticated and confidential activity they often complicates the collection process information , as seen​ in disclosure Pinrang Mall Building case , where the perpetrator utilise gap law and ambiguity extension agreement rent For Keep going manage building after the rental period ended . [10] Based on background behind on so can formulated problem as following : How Function of Intelligence Prosecutor in disclose the occurrence suspicion act criminal corruption in the city Pinrang (Study at Pinrang District Attorney's Office )? And what just Obstacles faced by Intelligence Prosecutors in to reveal the occurrence suspicion act criminal corruption in the city Pinrang (Study at Pinrang District Attorney's Office )?

METHOD

Study This is study law empirical . With do study to type study field that is to study provision applicable law​ as well as what happened​ in reality in society . [11] Or in other words , namely a research conducted​ to condition Actually or condition real in society with Meaning For to know and find the facts and data that will needed . After the required data collected Then towards identification​ the problem that ultimately towards a resolution problem . Every study must be always accompanied by with thinking thinking theoretical . This is due to Because existence reciprocal relationship​ between theory with activities data collection , data construction , data management and data analysis . [12]

DISCUSSION

The Function of Intelligence Prosecutors in Revealing The occurrence Allegation Action Criminal Corruption in Pinrang City .

Before discuss about Function Intelligence Pinrang District Attorney's Office in disclose the occurrence suspicion act criminal corruption , then moreover formerly served about description general about Pinrang District Attorney's Office . Pinrang District Attorney's Office ( Kejari) Pinrang ) in structural located below​ South Sulawesi High Prosecutor's Office ( Kejati) South Sulawesi ) and the Attorney General's Office of the Republic of Indonesia which is located in the Capital City of the State. Regency Pinrang own area of 1,961.77 km² with amount resident around 351,118 people and the level density resident of 171 people /km². [13] Pinrang District Attorney's Office located on Jl. Jend . Sukowati , Kelurahan Macorawalie , District The Water Sawitto , Regency Pinrang , South Sulawesi, and now This headed by Agung Bagus Kade Kusimantara Pinrang District Attorney's Office own mandatory vision and mission​ applied by all member Pinrang District Attorney's Office For support his role as institution enforcer professional , proportional and accountable law . Institutions​ This on duty in a way independent with to uphold right basic man in accordance the principle of a state based on the rule of law of Pancasila, in order to reduce act crime . The main purpose from effort This is For create a free society from action corruption , whether carried out by the authorities and state officials , as well as remove element corruption , collusion and nepotism as step in to finish violation right basic human . Vision and mission Pinrang District Attorney's Office focus on enforcement right basic humans and optimization eradication corruption , according to with role The prosecutor's office is regulated in Article 2 Paragraph (1) of Law no. 16 of 2004 concerning The Attorney General's Office of the Republic of Indonesia in Constitution the state that . " The Attorney General's Office of the Republic of Indonesia which will then in Constitution This called prosecutor's office is institution implementing government​ state power in the field of prosecution as well as other authorities based on law .”. Law Number 16 of 2004 concerning The Attorney General's Office of the Republic of Indonesia regulates about duties , functions and authorities Prosecutor's Office as institution enforcer law in Indonesia. In the law This , the Prosecutor's Office given role For operate activity intelligence in support task investigation , inquiry and prosecution , especially in cases act criminal corruption , terrorism and violations significant law​ others . The role of intelligence This aiming For gather relevant information for the benefit of enforcement effective law .​

Activity intelligence conducted by the Prosecutor's Office is also related with Constitution Number 17 of 2011 Article 13 paragraph ( 2) concerning State Intelligence , stated that . “ Function Intelligence as referred to in paragraph (1) shall be implemented in accordance with provision regulation legislation .” Where the Law Number 17 of 2011 Article 1 paragraph (1) explains . " Intelligence is knowledge , organization , and related activities with formulation policies , national strategies , and decision making decision based on analysis from information and facts collected​ through method Work For detection and warning early in frame prevention , control and mitigation every threat to security national .” Intelligence process this is also not only limited to efforts preventive , but also includes actions repressive If found proof strong on suspicion act criminal corruption . When indications Enough clearly , the data analyzed more continued and delivered to Field Action Criminal Special For more handling​ in depth . Intelligence in the Prosecutor's Office also carries out role security intelligence , or PAM, which aims to protect the legal process from various form threats , disturbances , obstacles and challenges (AGHT) that may occur appears . This PAM become very important For ensure that case corruption can processed in a way fair without existence pressure from party outside . [14]

In addition , the field Intelligence The prosecutor's office also carried out fundraising intelligence , or GAL, as effort For build connection Good with various element society , such as students , organizations society , media and government area . Relationship This functioning as effort For detect threat since early and weaving Work same who supports effort enforcement law . Information from public often helps​ in identification location or the alleged situation become place the occurrence act criminal corruption . For enrich discussion in study this , will served data table containing amount case act criminal corruption in the Regency Pinrang based on year , namely during period 2020 to 2024. This data aiming For give description quantitative about development amount case corruption in the area in period time certain

NUMBER OF CORRUPTION CASES HANDLED BY

PROSECUTOR 'S OFFICE ( 2020 to Year 2024)

Data Source : Pinrang District Attorney's Office

The table describe amount case act criminal corruption handled by the Pinrang District Attorney's Office during period 2020 to 2024. In 2020 to 2022 , every the year there is 1 case being handled , and everything has succeed executed . The year 2023 recorded improvement moderate with 3 cases handled , and in all has executed . In 2024 , back only there is 1 case being handled , which has also been executed . This data reflect that Pinrang District Attorney's Office in a way consistent finish all over case corruption handled​ every year .

THEIR OCCUPATIONAL BACKGROUND ( 2020 to Year 2024)

Data Source : Pinrang District Attorney's Office

This table show perpetrator data act criminal corruption based on background behind work from 2020 to 2024. In 2020 , only there is One the perpetrator who came from from category Self-employed , while other categories no take notes existence perpetrator corruption . The year 2021 recorded One perpetrator from category Civil Servants ( PNS ), and in 2022 , the perpetrators originate from category Village Head / Staff / Treasurer with amount one person. The year 2023 becomes year with amount perpetrator the highest , namely three people, consisting of from One perpetrator from civil servant category and two perpetrators from category Village Head / Staff / Treasurer . While that , in 2024 , only One registered perpetrators​ from category Self-employed . During period This category of BUMN /BUMD and Housewives ( IRT) does not apply take notes existence perpetrator corruption . Pinrang District Attorney's Office consistent handle all case corruption is accepted , with surge cases in 2023. Variations​ amount perpetrator based on background behind work show challenge wide in eradicate corruption in various sector , especially in the same year . In general overall , category most frequent jobs recorded are civil servants, self-employed , and village heads / staff / treasurers , with variation amount different actors​ each the year . [15]

Obstacles Faced​ Intelligence Prosecutor's Office in Revealing Allegation Action Criminal Corruption .

In an attempt eradication act criminal corruption ( tipikor ), Prosecutor's Office often face various obstacles , whether originating from from internal and external external . Barriers This appear along with condition Prosecutor's Office in carry out task eradication corruption . Eradication corruption No only become not quite enough answer apparatus enforcer laws and institutions related , but also a duties and obligations all over element nation , so that expected to Indonesia's future can avoid from problem corruption . Action criminal corruption is act classified crimes​ as an extraordinary crime or crime outside normal because perpetrator use mode with complex methods and patterns​ in to launch his actions . The perpetrator corruption tend make an effort reverse truth to influence enforcer law . [16] Therefore , from That in operate his duties , Intelligence Prosecutor's Office experience various obstacles . According to Fauzan Eka Prasetia , as Head of Intelligence Pinrang District Attorney's Office state that . There are several constraint in disclosure suspicion act criminal corruption . [17] Usage budget sourced from from the APBN/APBD carried out in a way No transparent so that make it difficult Prosecutor's Office For do supervision . Limited budget in the Table of Contents Implementation Budget (DIPA) owned Prosecutor's Office . In the implementation disclosure corruption often need sufficient budget​ big , especially For provide team expert certain that require cost big , for example expert construction , while in the budget DIPA For expert Already determined the amount is not in accordance with need expert mentioned . [18]

District Attorney's Office has not yet supported with tool wiretapping , while in Article 30C letter i given authority For do tapping based on Constitution special that regulates about wiretapping and conducting center monitoring in the field act criminal . Field Intelligence Prosecutor's Office No can Again do investigation open with do summons through invitation to parties that need to requested statement .” Considering existence various obstacles faced by the Intelligence Team in operate task , requires a strategy to increase role Sexy Intelligence use to reveal suspicion act criminal corruption in a way effective . Disclosure case corruption No can done in a way independent so that need participation from various party . Fauzan Eka Prasetia , stated that one of steps taken​ is strengthen network with various element society , such as observers , students , institutions self-reliance community (NGOs), journalists or media, until public general . Strengthening network This aiming For to obtain information small However significant that can support task intelligence , especially remember limitations amount owned personnel . This effort done through personal approach , such as to weave informal communication in places strategic or through fundraising information in the environment housing area . In its implementation , technique disguise often used For digging up important data related to the target of the investigation . Information This can obtained Good in a way directly by the officer intelligence and through Work The same with informant .

CONCLUSION

Function of Intelligence Prosecutor in to reveal suspicion act criminal corruption in the Prosecutor's Office involving various role important to support the effective investigation and prosecution process . Intelligence Prosecutor do fundraising information with community , journalists , and NGOs, as well as disguise For identify potential act criminal . In addition , intelligence play a role in operation monitoring For ensure proof No removed and helped to reveal network perpetrator corruption . With function this , intelligence support The District Attorney's Office in effort eradicate corruption in a way effective and prevent state losses are greater continue . In running his duties , Intelligence Prosecutor face various obstacles , both internal and external external . Internal obstacles include limited​ budget For to fund investigations that require team experts , and limitations source Power humans . In addition , the unavailability tool adequate wiretapping​ become constraint significant in the process of investigation . As for the obstacles external faced​ covers existence pressure from parties certain who are trying thwart the legal process , and non-transparency in use budget from the APBN/APBD which makes it difficult supervision . Although Thus , the Intelligence Prosecutor still committed For carry out his job in a way professional in accordance procedure applicable law .​ Increase effectiveness of Intelligence Prosecutor in to reveal suspicion act criminal corruption must required strengthening source Power man through training specializing in the field investigation corruption . In addition , procurement supporting tools and technologies , such as device legitimate and sophisticated wiretapping , must​ become priority main . and its importance expand network Work The same with society , media, institutions self-reliance community (NGOs), and institutions related use to obtain information accurate and relevant start​ in support the investigation process.To overcome Intelligence Prosecutor's Obstacle in to reveal act criminal corruption , necessary done improvement budget For investigation , provision team experts , and procurement tool legitimate wiretapping . Regulations that strengthen​ the authority of the Intelligence Prosecutor , in particular in investigation open , also necessary fixed .

References

1. M. F. Ramadhan, “Legal Review of Action Criminal Exploitation of Street Children at Crossroads in the Name of Beggars,” vol. 1, no. 2, pp. 1–7, 2025.
2. M. F. Ramadhan, A. Asis, and A. M. Muin, “Law Enforcement Of The Crime Of Illegal Fishing In The Waters Area Of Pangkajene Regency And The Islands,” vol. 11, no. 3, pp. 1904–1909, 2022, doi: 10.35335/legal.
3. H. M. Supardi, H. Thalib, & Azwad, and R. Hambali, “Perlindungan hukum terhadap penyidikan anak yang menjadi korban tindak pidana pelecehan seksual,” J. Lex Gen., vol. 2, no. 6, pp. 1716–1731, 2021.
4. A. Jayadi, “Perlindungan Hukum Terhadap Saksi,” El-Iqthisadi J. Huk. Ekon. Syariah Fak. Syariah dan Huk., vol. 2, no. 1, p. 130, 2020, doi: 10.24252/el-iqthisadi.v2i1.14236.
5. L. M. Hambali Thalib, “Efektivitas Penyidikan Terhadap Penjualan Kosmetik Ilegal,” ournal Lex Gen. ( JLS ), vol. 2, no. 1, pp. 1410–1424, 2021.
6. P. I. Rahadjie, M. Hafidz, and A. P. Buana, “Journal of Lex Generalis ( JLS ),” J. Lex Gen., vol. 3, no. 3, pp. 404–417, 2022.
7. A. R. Hardianto Djanggih, Hambali Thalib, “The Corruption Investigation In The Regional Police of Riau Islands, Indonesia Penyidikan,” Indones. J. Law Econ. Rev., vol. 14, no. 1, pp. 6–14, 2022.
8. A. Nur, H. Thalib, and M. Rinaldy Bima, “Penerapan Asas Legalitas Dalam Penegakan Hukum Pelaku Tindak Pidana Narkotika Berdasarkan Ketentuan Minimum Khusus,” J. Lex Gen. (JLS, vol. vol 2, no. 7, p. hlm 10., 2021.
9. I. A. Wijaya and H. Purwadi, “Pemberian Restitusi Sebagai Perlindungan Hukum Korban Tindak Pidana,” J. Huk. dan Pembang. Ekon., vol. 6, no. 2, pp. 93–111, 2018, doi: 10.20961/hpe.v6i2.17728.
10. Y. Kartika and A. Najemi, “Kebijakan Hukum Perbuatan Pelecehan Seksual (Catcalling) dalam Perspektif Hukum Pidana,” PAMPAS J. Crim. Law, vol. 1, no. 2, pp. 1–21, 2021, doi: 10.22437/pampas.v1i2.9114.
11. F. S. R. Nurul Qamar, Metode Penelitian Hukum: Doktrinal dan Non-Doktrinal, vol. 11, no. 1. 2020.
12. N. Qamar et al., “Metode Penelitian Hukum (Legal Research Methods),” no. December, p. 176, 2017.
13. A. Kep, D. Penguatan, R. Kemenristekdikti, U. Nomor, T. Tentang, and M. Uang, “De Jure De Jure,” J. Penelit. Huk., vol. 19, no. 3, pp. 339–348, 2019.
14. L. Yumna and A. Taufik, Sosiologi, Hukum, Sosiologi Hukum. 2023.
15. FARAHDIBA FITRIANI BACHTIAR, “TINJAUAN YURIDIS TERHADAP PERKARA PERCERAIAN DIKALANGAN PEGAWAI NEGERI SIPIL (Studi Kasus Pengadilan Agama Karanganyar dan Surakarta),” Nucleic Acids Res., vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 1–7, 2018, [Online]. Available: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.gde.2016.09.008%0Ahttp://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00412-015-0543-8%0Ahttp://dx.doi.org/10.1038/nature08473%0Ahttp://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jmb.2009.01.007%0Ahttp://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jmb.2012.10.008%0Ahttp://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s4159
16. Suparyanto dan Rosad (2015, “PERLINDUNGAN HUKUM TERHADAP SAKSI PELAKU YANG BEKERJASAMA DALAM PERKARA TINDAK PIDANA KORUPSI Jacob,” Suparyanto dan Rosad (2015, vol. 5, no. 3, pp. 248–253, 2020.
17. S. Rasul, “Penerapan Good Governance di Indonesia dalam Upaya Pencegahan Tindak Pidana Korupsi,” Mimb. Huk. - Fak. Huk. Univ. Gadjah Mada, vol. 21, no. 3, p. 538, 2012, doi: 10.22146/jmh.16276.
18. B. Wicaksono, A. Agis, and N. Qamar, “Penanggulangan Tindak Pidana Korupsi Dalam Pengelolaan Keuangan Dana Desa,” J. Lex Gen., vol. 2, no. 2, pp. 1–5, 2021.