[
ABSTRAKTesis ini membahas proses penegakan hukum oleh Subdit III Tipikor
Direktorat Reserses Kriminal Khusus Polda Bali terkait penyidikan tindak pidana
korupsi yang melibatkan kepala daerah (studi kasus : kasus dugaan korupsi
pipanisasi yang melibatkan Bupati Karangasem Bali I Wayan Geredeg).
Permasalahan penelitian difokuskan pada proses penyidikan kasus korupsi
pipanisasi yang dilakukan oleh penyidik Subdit Tipikor berjalan lambat.
Penelitian menggunakan pendekatan kualitatif dengan metode pencarian data-data
di lapangan melalui wawancara terhadap informan serta studi dokumentasi.
Temuan fakta di lapangan guna menjawab masalah penelitian mengapa
penyidikan tindak pidana korupsi pipanisasi berjalan lambat dan faktor-faktor
yang mempengaruhi proses penyidikan kasus tersebut.
Hasil penelitian menemukan fakta bahwa proses penyidikan yang
dilakukan oleh penyidik Subdit Tipikor Direktorat Reserses Kriminal Khusus
Polda Bali terhadap kasus korupsi pipanisasi yang melibatkan Bupati Wayan
Geredeg berjalan lambat. Penyidikan yang tidak kunjung tuntas sejak Oktober
2011 hingga saat ini dinilai tidak lazim dalam proses penyelidikan dan penyidikan
jika berpedoman pada Perkap Nomor 14 Tahun 2012 tentang Manajemen
Penyidikan Tindak Pidana. Penyidik mengalami beberapa hambatan dalam
menuntaskan kasus ini, yaitu: membutuhkan lintas koordinasi, perbedaan persepsi
antara penyidik dan penuntut umum terkait kerugian negara, serta perbedaan
sistem kerja yang dijalankan masing-masing unsur penegak hukum.
Selain beberapa hambatan tersebut, beberapa faktor lain juga
mempengaruhi lambatnya proses penyidikan yang dijalankan oleh Subdit Tipikor
diantaranya : sumber daya manusia yang belum memenuhi kebutuhan dari segi
kuantitatif (jumlah personil yang masih kurang) maupun kualitatif (pendidikan
dan keterampilan terbatas), penerapan metode manajemen penyidikan yang tidak
sesuai, kesejahteraan personil, serta komitmen pimpinan Polri dan jajarannya.
Kesimpulan dari penelitian ini adalah proses penegakan hukum yang
dijalankan Subdit Tipikor Direktorat Reserse Kriminal Khusus Polda Bali
terhadap penyidikan tindak pidana korupsi pipanisasi berjalan lambat karenanya
Polri perlu menjalin komunikasi dan koordinasi yang lebih intensif antar instansi
yang terlibat (Kejaksaan, BPKP, KPK, Tim Ahli) untuk memperlancar dan
mempercepat proses penyidikan. Selain itu perlu ada kesepakatan antara penyidik
dan penuntut umum dalam pemenuhan syarat materiil dan formil dalam proses
penegakan hukum tindak pidana korupsi, salah satunya terkait kerugian negara.
ABSTRACTThis thesis discussed the legal processes carried out by Bali?s Police
Special Crimes Investigation Directorate in particular Sub-Directorate III, which
oversees corruption crimes, in the corruption case of a regional head (a case study
of the pipelines corruption case involving Bali?s Karangasem Regent, I Wayan
Geredeg). The research lays its focus on the slow-handling of the investigative
processes carried out by the directorate?s investigators. The research uses
qualitative approach, by employing several methods of data collection techniques
in the field, such as interviews with related individuals and documentation study.
The process of data collection is geared towards finding out why the investigation
ran at a slow-paced speed and what are the causes or factors that contributed to
such condition.
The research?s findings confirmed the slow-paced nature of the
investigation. The never-ending investigation that started in October 2011 until
the present time communicated a sense of abnormality in particular against the
backdrop of the national police?s head regulation number 14 issued in 2012 on the
management of a criminal act. Investigators seemed to encounter several obstacles
in solving the case such as the need for a cross-coordination, difference in
perceptions between the investigators and the prosecutors in determining the
amount of state liabilities or state loss and the difference found in the work ethics
of each member of the law enforcers.
In addition to the obstacles mentioned above, other factors also seemed to
contribute to the slow-paced nature of the investigation by the directorate,
including factors such as the need for more human resources both in quantitative
terms and qualitative terms (several investigators are known to have limited
educational backgrounds and skills), the application of an inappropriate or
unsuitable investigative management method, investigator?s welfare issues and
the police?s own commitment in solving the case.
The research concludes that the legal processes undergone by investigators
from the directorate in the pipelines corruption case were lagging behind because
the police needed to establish a more intensive communication and coordination
strategy between the related law enforcement agencies such as the prosecutors
office, term of experts, the corruption eradication commision and the development
finance comptroller (BPKP) to hasten the investigative process. More over there
need to be an agreement in place between the investigators and the general
prosecutors in meeting the material and formal prerequisites in the legal process
of a corruption case, for example in determining the amount of state liabilites or
loss.;This thesis discussed the legal processes carried out by Bali?s Police
Special Crimes Investigation Directorate in particular Sub-Directorate III, which
oversees corruption crimes, in the corruption case of a regional head (a case study
of the pipelines corruption case involving Bali?s Karangasem Regent, I Wayan
Geredeg). The research lays its focus on the slow-handling of the investigative
processes carried out by the directorate?s investigators. The research uses
qualitative approach, by employing several methods of data collection techniques
in the field, such as interviews with related individuals and documentation study.
The process of data collection is geared towards finding out why the investigation
ran at a slow-paced speed and what are the causes or factors that contributed to
such condition.
The research?s findings confirmed the slow-paced nature of the
investigation. The never-ending investigation that started in October 2011 until
the present time communicated a sense of abnormality in particular against the
backdrop of the national police?s head regulation number 14 issued in 2012 on the
management of a criminal act. Investigators seemed to encounter several obstacles
in solving the case such as the need for a cross-coordination, difference in
perceptions between the investigators and the prosecutors in determining the
amount of state liabilities or state loss and the difference found in the work ethics
of each member of the law enforcers.
In addition to the obstacles mentioned above, other factors also seemed to
contribute to the slow-paced nature of the investigation by the directorate,
including factors such as the need for more human resources both in quantitative
terms and qualitative terms (several investigators are known to have limited
educational backgrounds and skills), the application of an inappropriate or
unsuitable investigative management method, investigator?s welfare issues and
the police?s own commitment in solving the case.
The research concludes that the legal processes undergone by investigators
from the directorate in the pipelines corruption case were lagging behind because
the police needed to establish a more intensive communication and coordination
strategy between the related law enforcement agencies such as the prosecutors
office, term of experts, the corruption eradication commision and the development
finance comptroller (BPKP) to hasten the investigative process. More over there
need to be an agreement in place between the investigators and the general
prosecutors in meeting the material and formal prerequisites in the legal process
of a corruption case, for example in determining the amount of state liabilites or
loss., This thesis discussed the legal processes carried out by Bali?s Police
Special Crimes Investigation Directorate in particular Sub-Directorate III, which
oversees corruption crimes, in the corruption case of a regional head (a case study
of the pipelines corruption case involving Bali?s Karangasem Regent, I Wayan
Geredeg). The research lays its focus on the slow-handling of the investigative
processes carried out by the directorate?s investigators. The research uses
qualitative approach, by employing several methods of data collection techniques
in the field, such as interviews with related individuals and documentation study.
The process of data collection is geared towards finding out why the investigation
ran at a slow-paced speed and what are the causes or factors that contributed to
such condition.
The research?s findings confirmed the slow-paced nature of the
investigation. The never-ending investigation that started in October 2011 until
the present time communicated a sense of abnormality in particular against the
backdrop of the national police?s head regulation number 14 issued in 2012 on the
management of a criminal act. Investigators seemed to encounter several obstacles
in solving the case such as the need for a cross-coordination, difference in
perceptions between the investigators and the prosecutors in determining the
amount of state liabilities or state loss and the difference found in the work ethics
of each member of the law enforcers.
In addition to the obstacles mentioned above, other factors also seemed to
contribute to the slow-paced nature of the investigation by the directorate,
including factors such as the need for more human resources both in quantitative
terms and qualitative terms (several investigators are known to have limited
educational backgrounds and skills), the application of an inappropriate or
unsuitable investigative management method, investigator?s welfare issues and
the police?s own commitment in solving the case.
The research concludes that the legal processes undergone by investigators
from the directorate in the pipelines corruption case were lagging behind because
the police needed to establish a more intensive communication and coordination
strategy between the related law enforcement agencies such as the prosecutors
office, term of experts, the corruption eradication commision and the development
finance comptroller (BPKP) to hasten the investigative process. More over there
need to be an agreement in place between the investigators and the general
prosecutors in meeting the material and formal prerequisites in the legal process
of a corruption case, for example in determining the amount of state liabilites or
loss.]
T-Fera Belinda.pdf :: Unduh