Corruption: Does Environmental Damage Constitute State’s Financial Loss?

DOI

10.2991/iceml-18.2018.12How to use a DOI?

Keywords

Corruption, KPK, Financial Loss, Environmental Damage

Abstract

The purpose of this paper is to analyze the equalization of environmental damage with the financial loss of the State by the KPK’s prosecutor in indicting the perpetrators of corruption charged under article 2 and 3 of Act No. 31 Year 1999. The decision of the Corruption Court in Nur Alam case stating that the accused has been proven in committing corruption which is detrimental to the State's financial or economy, is a new breakthrough in handling corruption cases related to environmental damage. For the first time, the KPK’s Prosecutor equates environmental damage with financial or economic losses of the State in Article 2 and Article 3. This paper will argue that the KPK’s Prosecutor has used both the analogy and extensive interpretation. This article then explains the reasons, in which original definition of the State financial loss does not cover environmental damage. Secondly, the existence of Article 4 of the law on corruption eradication shows that environmental damage is not included in the State financial loss. The last is that the law maker does not have the idea that environmental damage is included in the State financial loss.

Copyright

© 2018, the Authors. Published by Atlantis Press.

Open Access

This is an open access article distributed under the CC BY-NC license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/).

Download article (PDF)

TY  - CONF
AU  - Bambang Sugiri
AU  - Alfons Zakaria
PY  - 2018/09
DA  - 2018/09
TI  - Corruption: Does Environmental Damage Constitute State’s Financial Loss?
BT  - Proceedings of the 2018 International Conference on Energy and Mining Law (ICEML 2018)
PB  - Atlantis Press
SP  - 46
EP  - 50
SN  - 2352-5428
UR  - https://doi.org/10.2991/iceml-18.2018.12
DO  - 10.2991/iceml-18.2018.12
ID  - Sugiri2018/09
ER  -