[ABSTRAK Tesis ini membahas proses penegakan hukum oleh Subdit III TipikorDirektorat Reserses Kriminal Khusus Polda Bali terkait penyidikan tindak pidanakorupsi yang melibatkan kepala daerah (studi kasus : kasus dugaan korupsipipanisasi yang melibatkan Bupati Karangasem Bali I Wayan Geredeg).Permasalahan penelitian difokuskan pada proses penyidikan kasus korupsipipanisasi yang dilakukan oleh penyidik Subdit Tipikor berjalan lambat.Penelitian menggunakan pendekatan kualitatif dengan metode pencarian data-datadi lapangan melalui wawancara terhadap informan serta studi dokumentasi.Temuan fakta di lapangan guna menjawab masalah penelitian mengapapenyidikan tindak pidana korupsi pipanisasi berjalan lambat dan faktor-faktoryang mempengaruhi proses penyidikan kasus tersebut.Hasil penelitian menemukan fakta bahwa proses penyidikan yangdilakukan oleh penyidik Subdit Tipikor Direktorat Reserses Kriminal KhususPolda Bali terhadap kasus korupsi pipanisasi yang melibatkan Bupati WayanGeredeg berjalan lambat. Penyidikan yang tidak kunjung tuntas sejak Oktober2011 hingga saat ini dinilai tidak lazim dalam proses penyelidikan dan penyidikanjika berpedoman pada Perkap Nomor 14 Tahun 2012 tentang ManajemenPenyidikan Tindak Pidana. Penyidik mengalami beberapa hambatan dalammenuntaskan kasus ini, yaitu: membutuhkan lintas koordinasi, perbedaan persepsiantara penyidik dan penuntut umum terkait kerugian negara, serta perbedaansistem kerja yang dijalankan masing-masing unsur penegak hukum.Selain beberapa hambatan tersebut, beberapa faktor lain jugamempengaruhi lambatnya proses penyidikan yang dijalankan oleh Subdit Tipikordiantaranya : sumber daya manusia yang belum memenuhi kebutuhan dari segikuantitatif (jumlah personil yang masih kurang) maupun kualitatif (pendidikandan keterampilan terbatas), penerapan metode manajemen penyidikan yang tidaksesuai, kesejahteraan personil, serta komitmen pimpinan Polri dan jajarannya.Kesimpulan dari penelitian ini adalah proses penegakan hukum yangdijalankan Subdit Tipikor Direktorat Reserse Kriminal Khusus Polda Baliterhadap penyidikan tindak pidana korupsi pipanisasi berjalan lambat karenanyaPolri perlu menjalin komunikasi dan koordinasi yang lebih intensif antar instansiyang terlibat (Kejaksaan, BPKP, KPK, Tim Ahli) untuk memperlancar danmempercepat proses penyidikan. Selain itu perlu ada kesepakatan antara penyidikdan penuntut umum dalam pemenuhan syarat materiil dan formil dalam prosespenegakan hukum tindak pidana korupsi, salah satunya terkait kerugian negara. ABSTRACT This thesis discussed the legal processes carried out by Bali?s PoliceSpecial Crimes Investigation Directorate in particular Sub-Directorate III, whichoversees corruption crimes, in the corruption case of a regional head (a case studyof the pipelines corruption case involving Bali?s Karangasem Regent, I WayanGeredeg). The research lays its focus on the slow-handling of the investigativeprocesses carried out by the directorate?s investigators. The research usesqualitative approach, by employing several methods of data collection techniquesin the field, such as interviews with related individuals and documentation study.The process of data collection is geared towards finding out why the investigationran at a slow-paced speed and what are the causes or factors that contributed tosuch condition.The research?s findings confirmed the slow-paced nature of theinvestigation. The never-ending investigation that started in October 2011 untilthe present time communicated a sense of abnormality in particular against thebackdrop of the national police?s head regulation number 14 issued in 2012 on themanagement of a criminal act. Investigators seemed to encounter several obstaclesin solving the case such as the need for a cross-coordination, difference inperceptions between the investigators and the prosecutors in determining theamount of state liabilities or state loss and the difference found in the work ethicsof each member of the law enforcers.In addition to the obstacles mentioned above, other factors also seemed tocontribute to the slow-paced nature of the investigation by the directorate,including factors such as the need for more human resources both in quantitativeterms and qualitative terms (several investigators are known to have limitededucational backgrounds and skills), the application of an inappropriate orunsuitable investigative management method, investigator?s welfare issues andthe police?s own commitment in solving the case.The research concludes that the legal processes undergone by investigatorsfrom the directorate in the pipelines corruption case were lagging behind becausethe police needed to establish a more intensive communication and coordinationstrategy between the related law enforcement agencies such as the prosecutorsoffice, term of experts, the corruption eradication commision and the developmentfinance comptroller (BPKP) to hasten the investigative process. More over thereneed to be an agreement in place between the investigators and the generalprosecutors in meeting the material and formal prerequisites in the legal processof a corruption case, for example in determining the amount of state liabilites orloss.;This thesis discussed the legal processes carried out by Bali?s PoliceSpecial Crimes Investigation Directorate in particular Sub-Directorate III, whichoversees corruption crimes, in the corruption case of a regional head (a case studyof the pipelines corruption case involving Bali?s Karangasem Regent, I WayanGeredeg). The research lays its focus on the slow-handling of the investigativeprocesses carried out by the directorate?s investigators. The research usesqualitative approach, by employing several methods of data collection techniquesin the field, such as interviews with related individuals and documentation study.The process of data collection is geared towards finding out why the investigationran at a slow-paced speed and what are the causes or factors that contributed tosuch condition.The research?s findings confirmed the slow-paced nature of theinvestigation. The never-ending investigation that started in October 2011 untilthe present time communicated a sense of abnormality in particular against thebackdrop of the national police?s head regulation number 14 issued in 2012 on themanagement of a criminal act. Investigators seemed to encounter several obstaclesin solving the case such as the need for a cross-coordination, difference inperceptions between the investigators and the prosecutors in determining theamount of state liabilities or state loss and the difference found in the work ethicsof each member of the law enforcers.In addition to the obstacles mentioned above, other factors also seemed tocontribute to the slow-paced nature of the investigation by the directorate,including factors such as the need for more human resources both in quantitativeterms and qualitative terms (several investigators are known to have limitededucational backgrounds and skills), the application of an inappropriate orunsuitable investigative management method, investigator?s welfare issues andthe police?s own commitment in solving the case.The research concludes that the legal processes undergone by investigatorsfrom the directorate in the pipelines corruption case were lagging behind becausethe police needed to establish a more intensive communication and coordinationstrategy between the related law enforcement agencies such as the prosecutorsoffice, term of experts, the corruption eradication commision and the developmentfinance comptroller (BPKP) to hasten the investigative process. More over thereneed to be an agreement in place between the investigators and the generalprosecutors in meeting the material and formal prerequisites in the legal processof a corruption case, for example in determining the amount of state liabilites orloss., This thesis discussed the legal processes carried out by Bali?s PoliceSpecial Crimes Investigation Directorate in particular Sub-Directorate III, whichoversees corruption crimes, in the corruption case of a regional head (a case studyof the pipelines corruption case involving Bali?s Karangasem Regent, I WayanGeredeg). The research lays its focus on the slow-handling of the investigativeprocesses carried out by the directorate?s investigators. The research usesqualitative approach, by employing several methods of data collection techniquesin the field, such as interviews with related individuals and documentation study.The process of data collection is geared towards finding out why the investigationran at a slow-paced speed and what are the causes or factors that contributed tosuch condition.The research?s findings confirmed the slow-paced nature of theinvestigation. The never-ending investigation that started in October 2011 untilthe present time communicated a sense of abnormality in particular against thebackdrop of the national police?s head regulation number 14 issued in 2012 on themanagement of a criminal act. Investigators seemed to encounter several obstaclesin solving the case such as the need for a cross-coordination, difference inperceptions between the investigators and the prosecutors in determining theamount of state liabilities or state loss and the difference found in the work ethicsof each member of the law enforcers.In addition to the obstacles mentioned above, other factors also seemed tocontribute to the slow-paced nature of the investigation by the directorate,including factors such as the need for more human resources both in quantitativeterms and qualitative terms (several investigators are known to have limitededucational backgrounds and skills), the application of an inappropriate orunsuitable investigative management method, investigator?s welfare issues andthe police?s own commitment in solving the case.The research concludes that the legal processes undergone by investigatorsfrom the directorate in the pipelines corruption case were lagging behind becausethe police needed to establish a more intensive communication and coordinationstrategy between the related law enforcement agencies such as the prosecutorsoffice, term of experts, the corruption eradication commision and the developmentfinance comptroller (BPKP) to hasten the investigative process. More over thereneed to be an agreement in place between the investigators and the generalprosecutors in meeting the material and formal prerequisites in the legal processof a corruption case, for example in determining the amount of state liabilites orloss.] |