Reformulasi Pertanggungjawaban Pidana Fraud Pada Lembaga Investasi Negara
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.26623/julr.v8i3.12957Keywords:
Danantara, Pencegahan Fraud, Sistem Hukum, Tata Kelola, Temasek HoldingsAbstract
This study analyzes the differences in the legal frameworks for fraud prevention in state investment institutions in Indonesia and Singapore to formulate an ideal model for strengthening Danantara's accountability as a state investment institution. The normative gap arises because Indonesia does not yet have an integrated legal system capable of addressing non-budgetary corporate fraud, while Singapore implements a more comprehensive approach through the PCA, Penal Code, and SFA, which are operated in an integrated manner by the CPIB, MAS, and CAD. This study uses a normative juridical method with legislative, comparative, and conceptual approaches to assess the effectiveness of regulations and formulate a reconstruction of the authority of law enforcement agencies. The results show that the limited definition of corruption in the Corruption Eradication Law and the scope of the Corruption Eradication Commission's authority, which is limited by Article 11, create a jurisdictional gap in handling fraud at Danantara. In contrast, Singapore has succeeded in establishing an integrated and preventive legal system based on the principle of corporate accountability. The novelty of this study lies in the idea of reformulating the KPK's authority to cover strategic corporate fraud and harmonizing criminal law and state investment governance within a single supervisory framework. These findings have important implications for the formulation of national policies to strengthen the integrity of state investment institutions through adaptive and prevention-oriented law enforcement.
Penelitian ini menganalisis perbedaan kerangka hukum pencegahan fraud pada lembaga investasi negara di Indonesia dan Singapura untuk merumuskan model ideal penguatan akuntabilitas Danantara sebagai lembaga investasi negara. Kesenjangan normatif muncul karena Indonesia belum memiliki sistem hukum terintegrasi yang mampu menjangkau fraud korporasi non-anggaran, sementara Singapura menerapkan pendekatan yang lebih komprehensif melalui PCA, Penal Code, dan SFA yang dioperasikan secara terpadu oleh CPIB, MAS, dan CAD. Penelitian ini menggunakan metode yuridis normatif dengan pendekatan perundang-undangan, perbandingan, dan konseptual untuk menilai efektivitas pengaturan dan merumuskan rekonstruksi kewenangan lembaga penegak hukum. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa keterbatasan definisi korupsi dalam UU Tipikor serta ruang lingkup kewenangan KPK yang dibatasi Pasal 11 menimbulkan jurisdictional gap dalam penanganan fraud di Danantara. Sebaliknya, Singapura berhasil membangun sistem hukum yang terintegrasi dan preventif berdasarkan prinsip akuntabilitas korporasi. Kebaruan penelitian ini terletak pada gagasan reformulasi kewenangan KPK untuk mencakup fraud korporasi strategis serta harmonisasi hukum pidana dan tata kelola investasi negara dalam satu kerangka pengawasan. Temuan ini memberikan implikasi penting bagi perumusan kebijakan nasional guna memperkuat integritas lembaga investasi negara melalui penegakan hukum yang adaptif dan berorientasi pada pencegahan.
References
Abdul, Wahid. “Pemberlakuan Hukum Ekstradisi Bagi Pelaku Tindak Pidana Korupsi.” Jurnal USM Law Review 6, no. 1 (2023): 34–34. https://doi.org/10.26623/julr.v6i1.5130.
Abidin, Fityan Izza Noor, Riza Arista Firana, and Sarwenda Biduri. “Fraud Pentagon In Detecting Financial Statement Fraud.” International Journal of Economic Integration and Regional Competitiveness 2, no. 2 (2025): 84–98. https://doi.org/10.61796/ijeirc.v2i2.324.
Agung, Mahkamah. “Putusan Nomor 25/PUU-XIV/2016,” 2017.
Amiati, Mia. “Private Sector Bribery as a Corruption Crime for Legal Certainty in Indonesia.” Journal of Law and Sustainable Development 12, no. 1 (2024): e2464. https://doi.org/10.55908/sdgs.v12i1.2464.
Argandoña, Antonio. “The United Nations Convention against Corruption and Its Impact on International Companies.” Journal of Business Ethics 74, no. 4 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-007-9524-z.10.1007/s10551-007-9524-z.
Ayres, Ian, and John Braithwaite. Responsive Regulation Transcending the Deregulation Debate. 1st ed. Newyork: Oxford University Press, 1992.
Boin, Arjen, Lauren A Fahy, and Paul’T Hart. Guardians of Public Value : How Public Organisations Become and Remain Institutions. Cham: Palgrave Macmillan, 2021.
Bulan, Dewi Nawang, and Nandang Sambas. “Kebijakan Pemidanaan Korporasi Dalam Ruu Kuhp: Analisis Normatif Dan Kesiapan Praktis Aparat Penegak Hukum.” Collegium Studiosum Journal 8, no. 1 (2025): 25–30. https://doi.org/10.56301/csj.v8i1.1654.
Calvin, Andreas. “Extraordinary Investigation Power of the Anti-Corruption Agencies in Indonesia and Singapore.” Tumou Tou Law Review 3, no. 1 (2024): 15–22. https://doi.org/10.35801/tourev.v3i1.52166.
Chen, Christopher. “Solving the Puzzle of Corporate Governance of State-Owned Enterprises: The Path of the Temasek Model in Singapore and Lessons for China.” Northwestern Journal of International Law and Business 36 (2016).
Christian, Natalis, and Joelyn Veronica. “Dampak Kecurangan Pada Bidang Keuangan Dan Non-Keuangan Terhadap Jenis Fraud Di Indonesia.” Jurnal Riset Akuntansi Mercu Buana 8, no. 1 (2022): 91–102. https://doi.org/10.26486/jramb.v8i1.2401.
CPIB. “Corrupt Practices Investigation Bureau. Annual Report 2023,” 2024.
DeMott, Deborah A. “Whistleblowers : Implications for Corporate Governance.” Washington University Law Review 1645-1668, 2021, 1645–68.
Dominikus Jawa, Parningotan Malau, Ciptono. “Tantangan Dalam Penegakan Hukum Tindak Pidana Korupsi Di Indonesia.” Jurnal Law Review 7, no. 2 (2024): 1006–17. https://doi.org/10.26623/julr.v7i2.9507.
Farida, Alchansyah. “Juridical Analysis Of The Independence Of The Corruption Eradication Commission As An Extra-Constitutional Institution In The Indonesian Constitutional System.” Jurnal Konstitusi Dan Demokrasi 4, no. 1 (2024): 56–64. https://doi.org/10.7454/jkd.v4i1.1403.
Firmansyah. “Penegakan Hukum Terhadap Persolan Korupsi Di Indonesia, Pendekatan Sistem Hukum L.W Friedman.” Madani Legal Review 6, no. 1 (2022): 79–90. https://doi.org/10.31850/malrev.v6i1.1709.
Gelpern, Anna. “Sovereignty, Accountability, and the Wealth Fund Governance Conundrum.” Articles in Law Reviews & Other Academic Journals 1, no. 1 (2011): 289–320. https://doi.org/10.1017/s2044251310000391.
Habaora, Fellyanus, Jefirstson Richset Riwukore, Hilda Manafe, Yohanes Susanto, and Tien Yustini. “Strategi Pencegahan Dan Pemberantasan Korupsi Di Pemerintah Kota Kupang, Provinsi Nusa Tenggara Timur, Indonesia.” Aspirasi: Jurnal Masalah-Masalah Sosial 11, no. 2 (2020): 229–42. https://doi.org/10.46807/aspirasi.v11i2.1556.
Halim, Mustafa ‘Afifi Ab, and Shabrina Zata Amni. “No Legal System in the Perspectives of H.L.A Hart and Lawrence M. Friedman.” Peradaban Journal of Law and Society 2, no. 1 (2023): 51–61. https://doi.org/10.59001/pjls.v2i1.83.
Hamaminata, Gani. “Perkembangan Sistem Peradilan Pidana.” Jurnal Hukum, Politik Dan Ilmu Sosial (JHPIS) 2, no. 4 (2023): 52–64. https://doi.org/10.55606/jhpis.v2i4.2334.
Haq, Hamidul. “Book Review The Law On Corruption In Singapore: By Tan Boon Gin.” Sal Academy Publishing, 2021, 1256–61.
Hessert, Björn, and Chui Ling Goh. “A Comparative Case Study of Match-Fixing Laws in Singapore, Australia, Germany, and Switzerland.” Asian Journal of Comparative Law 17, no. 2 (2022): 286–304. https://doi.org/10.1017/asjcl.2022.22.
Hiariej, Eddy Omar Sharif. “United Nations Convention Against Corruption Dalam Sistem Hukum Indonesia.” Mimbar Hukum-Fakultas Hukum Universitas Gadjah Mada 31, no. 1 (2019): 112–25.
Indonesia. Peraturan Pemerintah Republik Indonesia Nomor 43 Tahun 2018 tentang Tata Cara Pelaksanaan Peran Serta Masyarakat dan Pemberian Penghargaan dalam Pencegahan dan Pemberantasan Tindak Pidana Korupsi. Lembaran Negara Republik Indonesia Tahun 2018 N (n.d.).
Kaufmann, Daniel, Aart Kraay, and Massimo Mastruzzi. “The Worldwide Governance Indicators: Methodology and Analytical Issues.” Hague Journal on the Rule of Law 3, no. 2 (2011): 220–46. https://doi.org/10.1017/s1876404511200046.
Kit, Tang See. “Parliament Passes Bill to Enhance MAS Investigative Powers over Financial Sector.” CNA, 2025.
Lan, Luh Luh. “Corporate Governance in Singapore The Road Thus Far.” Journal of Business Law, no. 8 (2023): 661–76. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4296937.
Mardina, Deby, and Riswadi. “Penerapan Pasal 378 Kitab Undang-Undang Hukum Pidana Dalam Penerbitan Bilyet Giro Kosong (Studi Kasus Putusan Nomor 291/Pid.B/2014/PN.YYK).” Constitutum Jurnal Ilmiah Hukum 1, no. 1 (2022): 86–99. https://doi.org/10.37721/constitutum.v1i1.1139.
Mas. “Singapore Authorities Take Actions Against Noble Group Limited and Former Directors of Noble Resources International Pte Ltd,” 2022.
MAS. “Masterminds Behind The 2013 Penny Stocks Crash Convicted On Multiple Charges Of Market Manipulation And Cheating Of Financial Institutions,” 2022.
Nadianti, Eltasya, and Bambang Ali Kusumo. “Pendekatan Hukum Terhadap Pencucian Uang Melalui Akuntansi Forensik: Inovasi Dalam Pembuktian Tindak Pidana Ekonomi.” Indonesian Journal of Law and Justice 2, no. 4 (2025): 6–6. https://doi.org/10.47134/ijlj.v2i4.4137.
Nefi, Arman, and Adiwarman Adiwarman. “Indonesian Capital Market Investor Protection in Cases of Embezzlement.” Indonesia Law Review 13, no. 2 (2023).
Negara, GP. Aditya Prawira. “Penegakan Hukum Tindak Pidana Korupsi Di Indonesia Terhadap Pelaku Korporasi.” Jurnal Magister Hukum Perspektif 10, no. 1 (2022): 37–51. https://doi.org/10.37303/magister.v10i1.26.
Nugroho, Fendi, Hartiwiningsih Hartiwiningsih, and I Gusti Ayu. “Rethinking Subsidiary in Corruption Cases: Indonesian Experiences.” Journal of Human Rights, Culture and Legal System 5, no. 2 (2025): 686–713. https://doi.org/10.53955/jhcls.v5i2.714.
Pradina, Auly, and Emilia Susanti. “Analysis Of KPK Policy On Corruption Eradication In Indonesia The Review Of The Corruption Criminal Law.” Jurnal Hukum Sehasen 111, no. 1 (2025): 103–10. https://doi.org/10.37676/jhs.v11i1.7637.
Prasetiono, Yogi, Zaenal Arifin, and Kukuh Sudarmanto. “Implementasi Pemidanaan Pelaku Penyertaan (Deelneming) Tindak Pidana Korupsi.” Jurnal USM Law Review 5, no. 2 (2022): 647. https://doi.org/10.26623/julr.v5i2.5241.
Pujiyono, Pujiyono. “Rekonstruksi Sistem Peradilan Pidana Indonesia Dalam Perspektif Kemandirian Kekuasaan Kehakiman.” Masalah-Masalah Hukum 41, no. 1 (2012): 118–27. https://doi.org/10.14710/mmh.41.1.2012.118-127.
Quah, Jon S.T. “Leadership and Culture in Combating Corruption: A Comparative Analysis.” Public Administration and Policy 25, no. 2 (2022): 193–207. https://doi.org/10.1108/pap-05-2022-0043.
R, Sowmya. “Securities Law Enforcement and Credible Deterrence: Lessons for India from the United States and Singapore.” Social Science Research Network, 2025. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.5391633.
Rafif, Vedico, Nur Dhaifullah, and M Ramadhana Alfarizi. “A Comparative Study of the Law on Handling Corruption Crimes in Indonesia and Singapore.” Widya Gama Law Review 1, no. 2 (2024): 30–35. https://doi.org/10.31328/wglr.v1i2.595.
Raymond, Wee Keng Lock. “Current Issues Faced By Singapore In Investigating, Prosecuting & Adjudicating Corruption Cases,” 2022.
Reibyron, Nazurullah. “Aspek-Aspek Penegakan Tindak Pidana Hukum Progresif (Studi Sosiologi Hukum Pandangan Satjipto Rahardjo).” Jurnal Hukum Dan Pembangunan Ekonomi 10, no. 1 (2022): 85. https://doi.org/10.20961/hpe.v10i1.62839.
Sachruddin. “Penegakan Hukum Tindak Pidana Korupsi Di Indonesia Terhadap Pelaku Korporasi.” Jurnal Hukum, Administrasi Publik Dan Negara 2, no. 3 (2025). https://doi.org/10.62383/hukum.v2i3.262.
Sadono, Bambang, Ali Lubab, Zaenal Arifin, and Kadi Sukarna. “Kedudukan Komisi Pemberantasan Korupsi Dalam Sistem Ketatanegaraan Di Indonesia.” Jurnal USM Law Review 3, no. 2 (2020): 259–74. https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.26623/julr.v3i2.2870.
Setiawan, Muhammad Vikri, Lastuti Abubakar, and Ema Rahmawati. “Peran Pengendali Dalam Melindungi Kepentingan Investor Melalui Pelaksanaan Prinsip Tata Kelola Perusahaan Yang Baik.” Jurnal USM Law Review 6, no. 2 (2023): 724–724. https://doi.org/10.26623/julr.v6i2.6829.
Singapore, Monetary Authority of, Corrupt Practices Investigation Bureau, and Commercial Affairs Department. “Joint Statement by MAS, CPIB and CAD on Enhanced Collaboration in Financial Crime Investigations.” Media Release, 2024.
Sriwidodo, Joko. Perkembangan Sistem Peradilan Pidana Di Indonesia. Kepel Press, 2020.
Sudiarawan, Agus, and Putu Edgar Tanaya. “Discover the Legal Concept in the Sociological Study.” Jurnal Kajian Ilmu Hukum Dan Politik 3 (2020). https://doi.org/10.33096/sjijl.v3i1.69.
Surat Keputusan Bersama Ketua Komisi Pemberantasan Korupsi, Jaksa Agung Republik Indonesia, dan Kepala Kepolisian Negara Republik Indonesia Nomor 1 Tahun 2023, Nomor 16 Tahun 2023, Nomor 1 Tahun 2023 tentang Koordinasi Penanganan Perkara Tindak Pidana Kor (n.d.).
Survey, Youth Integrity. “Integrity And Corruption In Indonesia : What Do Young People Think ? Executive Summary,” 2012.
Suryana, Komang Genta, Ni Luh, and Gede Astariyani. “Comparison of Financial Institution Supervision between Indonesia’s Danantara and Singapore’s Temasek Holdings.” International Journal of Business, Law, and Education 6, no. 2 (2025): 1158–66. https://doi.org/10.56442/ijble.v6i2.1217.
Usman, Rachmadi. “Exploration of Nexus between Legal Liability and Corporate Fraud: Where Do Business Laws and Criminology Converge?” International Journal of Criminal Justice Sciences 18, no. 1 (2023): 232–43. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4756251.
Wan, Wai Yee, Christopher Chen, and Say H Goo. “Public and Private Enforcement of Corporate and Securities Laws: An Empirical Comparison of Hong Kong and Singapore.” European Business Organization Law Review 20, no. 2 (2019): 319–61. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40804-019-00129-z.
Yunida, Sofie, and Acynthia Ayu Wilasittha. “Perkembangan Fraud Theory Dan Relevansi Dalam Realita.” Seminar Nasional Akuntansi Dan Call for Paper 1, no. 2 (2021): 726–35. https://doi.org/10.33005/senapan.v1i2.160.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 JURNAL USM LAW REVIEW
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
The journal holds the copyright for each article published with work licensed simultaneously under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which allows others to share the work with an acknowledgment of the authorship and early publication of the work in this journal.
Citedness in Scopus 
