.png)
Legal Limits and Criteria for Settlement Fines in Corruption Cases Detrimental to the State Economy
Abstract
The proposed application of settlement fines to corruption cases involving national economic losses raises concerns about economic recovery and criminal accountability. This study examines the legal limits of settlement fines and formulates objective and subjective eligibility criteria. Employing normative legal research with statutory and conceptual approaches, legal materials are examined through prescriptive analysis. The findings indicate that settlement fines cannot be extended to corruption through prosecutorial discretion without explicit legislative authorization. The proposed eligibility framework considers offense classification, verified losses, financial capacity, offender cooperation, acknowledgment of responsibility, individual involvement, and criminal history. A preliminary loss threshold of IDR 100 million is proposed for individual offenders, while corporate offenders require stricter institutional scrutiny without a fixed monetary ceiling. The study concludes that implementing settlement fines in corruption cases requires legislative reform establishing clear eligibility standards, proportional recovery obligations, independent oversight, and enforceable compensation mechanisms to reconcile economic recovery with legal certainty and criminal accountability.
Keywords
Full Text:
PDFReferences
Arlen, J. (2016). Prosecuting beyond the rule of law: Corporate mandates imposed through deferred prosecution agreements. Journal of Legal Analysis, 8(1), 191–234. https://doi.org/10.1093/jla/law007
Aryani, F. D., & Mufty, A. M. (2026). Reformulating corporate criminal liability for environmental damage through restoration-oriented sanctions and compliance mechanisms in Indonesia framework. Kosmik Hukum, 26(2), 399–413. https://doi.org/10.30595/kosmikhukum.v26i2.29514
Azrina, N., Hafrida, H., & Erwin, E. (2026). Pembuktian unsur kerugian perekonomian negara pada tindak pidana korupsi sektor sumber daya alam di Indonesia. Jurnal Alwatzikhoebillah: Kajian Islam, Pendidikan, Ekonomi, Humaniora, 12(1), 504–513. https://doi.org/10.37567/alwatzikhoebillah.v12i1.5094
Becker, G. S. (1968). Crime and punishment: An economic approach. Journal of Political Economy, 76(2), 169–217. https://doi.org/10.1086/259394
Capus, N., & Brodersen, K. H. (2022). Negotiating without the victim state: The exclusiveness of anticorruption settlements. Journal of Financial Crime, 29(4), 1249–1268. https://doi.org/10.1108/JFC-11-2021-0247
De Franco, G., Small, R. C., & Wahid, A. S. (2025). Determinants of and future violations following deferred prosecution and non-prosecution agreements in corporate criminal cases. Contemporary Accounting Research, 42(2), 1271–1297. https://doi.org/10.1111/1911-3846.13039
De Vita, G., & Vozza, D. (2024). The ethics of deferred prosecution agreements for MNEs culpable of foreign corruption: Relativistic pragmatism or devil's pact? Business Ethics Quarterly, 34(4), 605–633. https://doi.org/10.1017/beq.2023.36
Fatkhurohman, F., & Kurniawan, N. (2017). Pergeseran delik korupsi dalam Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor 25/PUU-XIV/2016. Jurnal Konstitusi, 14(1), 1–21. https://doi.org/10.31078/jk1411
Gunawan, I. (2023). Penggunaan denda damai dalam tindak pidana ekonomi. The Prosecutor Law Review, 1(2), 68–86. https://doi.org/10.64843/prolev.v1i2.13
Handrawan. (2025). Dilema penerapan denda damai oleh jaksa dalam tindak pidana korupsi: Upaya mewujudkan pemulihan ekonomi nasional. LITIGASI, 26(1), 260–289. https://doi.org/10.23969/litigasi.v26i1.24112
Jiwanti, A., & Ervita, M. (2025). Urgency of expanding the meaning of state financial losses based on ecological losses resulting from corruption in the natural resources sector. JUSTISI, 11(3), 702–718. https://doi.org/10.33506/js.v11i3.4334
Katimin, H., Herman, F., & Farida, I. (2024). Legal hermeneutics of economic loss to the state and economic expert calculations. Jurnal Bina Mulia Hukum, 9(1), 96–111. https://doi.org/10.24198/jbmh.v9i1.1339
Lord, N. (2023). Prosecution deferred, prosecution exempt: On the interests of (in)justice in the non-trial resolution of transnational corporate bribery. The British Journal of Criminology, 63(4), 848–866. https://doi.org/10.1093/bjc/azac059
Marlina, A., Karauwan, D. E. S., Juanedy, A., & Ramadhani, A. (2025). The urgency of reformulating the handling of petty corruption through a peaceful fine scheme in Indonesia: Urgensi reformulasi penanganan korupsi ringan melalui skema denda damai di Indonesia. Al-Jinayah: Jurnal Hukum Pidana Islam, 11(1), 62–76. https://doi.org/10.15642/aj.2025.11.1.62-76
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2021). Recommendation of the Council for Further Combating Bribery of Foreign Public Officials in International Business Transactions (OECD/LEGAL/0378). https://legalinstruments.oecd.org/en/instruments/OECD-LEGAL-0378
Polinsky, A. M., & Shavell, S. (2000). The economic theory of public enforcement of law. Journal of Economic Literature, 38(1), 45–76. https://doi.org/10.1257/jel.38.1.45
Rachman, T., Minarno, N. B., Aprilianto, S., & Muzaki, H. (2023). Defining state economic loss due to corruption within the Indonesian law: Hurdle and solution. World Journal of Entrepreneurship, Management and Sustainable Development, 19(1–2), 53–67. https://doi.org/10.47556/J.WJEMSD.19.1-2.2023.5
Rachman, T., & Raspati, L. (2021). Menakar makna merugikan perekonomian negara dalam Undang-Undang Tipikor. Nagari Law Review, 4(2), 225–238. https://doi.org/10.25077/nalrev.v.4.i.2.p.225-238.2021
Rahmadi, A., Karjoko, L., & Hartiwiningsih. (2025). The price of corruption on state losses policy. Volksgeist: Jurnal Ilmu Hukum dan Konstitusi, 8(2), 479–502. https://doi.org/10.24090/volksgeist.v8i2.14813
Shiner, R. A., & Ho, H. (2018). Deferred prosecution agreements and the presumption of innocence. Criminal Law and Philosophy, 12(4), 707–723. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11572-018-9454-0
Sudarti, E., Usman, U., Salim, A. A., Lestari, R. D., & Anggriawan, R. (2026). Deferred prosecution agreements in Indonesian village fund corruption: Balancing legal certainty and public benefit. Journal of Law and Legal Reform, 7(2), 903–950. https://doi.org/10.15294/jllr.v7i2.33466
Suta, I. M. G. D., Prabandari, I. G. A. M., & Astariyani, N. L. G. (2021). Determining state's financial losses in corruption: An institutional power and constraint in Indonesia. Lentera Hukum, 8(1), 95–114. https://doi.org/10.19184/ejlh.v8i1.21923
United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime. (2023). Civil and administrative liability for corruption: Domestic practices and ways to enhance international cooperation under the United Nations Convention against Corruption. United Nations. https://www.unodc.org/documents/corruption/Publications/2023/Civil_and_Administrative_Liability_for_Corruption_UNODC_2023_EN.pdf
Utomo, S. M., Hamid, M. A., Ilyas, A., & Rahman, A. (2026). Reconstructing peace fines for economic crimes: Prosecutorial discretion, restorative and transformative justice within an Islamic legal ethics framework. Jurnal Ilmiah Mizani: Wacana Hukum, Ekonomi dan Keagamaan, 13(1), 304–321. https://doi.org/10.29300/mzn.v13i1.10644
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.47006/ijlres.v10i2.32396
Refbacks
- There are currently no refbacks.
Copyright (c) 2026 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL ON LANGUAGE, RESEARCH AND EDUCATION STUDIES
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
