Analisa Putusan Tindak Pidana Korupsi yang terjadi diwilayah hukum Pengadilan Negeri Pekanbaru

Abstract

Corruption is an act with intent unlawfully enrich themselves or another person ( individual or corporate ) that may adversely affect the financial or the state`seconomy. Corruption cases in riau province each year has increased, the number of cases of proven corruption that goes on the court Negeri Pekanbaru. Berdasarkan this understanding, the writing of this thesis ruformulation formulated two issues, namely : how do the charecteristics of the first cases of corruption in Pekanbaru? Both how disparity decisions Pekanbaru Corruption Court ? From the results of this study there are two main things that can be inferred. Firstly in cases of corruption that occurred diprovinsi the Riau region Pekanbaru Negri jurisdictions, legal corruption. The definition of legal corruption is corruption legislation passed through the area, the regional budge. The form can be traced through the project, inpromptu projects and project assistance. Corruption conservative. Froms of corruption include, acts of nepotism which provide maximum opportunities to families and close friends to benefit the post he held. Corruption routine expences. The design cost of routine office operations by preparing anggaranya no real interest each month. Every year fixed rountine office operations and is always increasing, although not consumable items older than a year . both judging from the quality of the decision, according to the author, there is lump and should be observed carefully. Which of the four cases of corruption charge, there are two cases together, but split into multiple files. Case comes from the same case and the same party, only later examination the case was split into several files (splitsing). So the case is characteristics ranging from indictment, prosecution, examination of evidence and witness even supposed to dijatuhkan. Namun decision, because the case is split into beberapa file (splitsing), then the consequence is that each file examined by the panel of judges different. And inequality understanding of the law of corruption would be a hindrance to law enforcement.