Non- Litigation Paradigm and the Principle of Criminal Proportionality in Corruption Cases with Mild Error Levels

Abstract

The general objective of this research is to be able to realize justice for perpetrators of corruption with a mild degree of guilt. The formulation of this research problem is: Why is there a need for a non-litigation approach and proportional principles in corruption cases with a mild degree of guilt? This research is a normative legal research that uses literature studies with a statutory approach and a case approach. The results of this study show that almost all crimes are processed by litigation, namely through the criminal justice system, including corruption with a mild degree of error. For example, an official is negligent when signing a contract. This official did not take or embezzle state money as stipulated in the Corruption Eradication Law in Indonesia. However, the case is still prosecuted until the perpetrator is sentenced to prison. This is an injustice for the perpetrator and contradicts the Theory of Justice. According to the author, it is fairer if such cases are resolved non-litigatively and apply the principle of proportionality which states that the severity of the punishment imposed must be balanced with the severity of the guilt and the weight of the crime committed. Sanctions should not exceed the guilt of the defendant. This principle is an important principle in the Theory of Punishment.