Policy Reconstruction in Combating Petty Corruption: Towards Progressive, Economic, and Utilitarian Justice

  • Andhika Prima Sandhy Universitas Kristen Indonesia, Indonesia
  • John Pieris Universitas Kristen Indonesia, Indonesia
  • Aarce Tehupeiory Universitas Kristen Indonesia, Indonesia
  • Hulman Panjaitan Universitas Kristen Indonesia, Indonesia

Abstract

Combating petty corruption in Indonesia raises normative and budgetary concerns when case-handling costs exceed the losses to state finances or the national economy that can be recovered. This issue must not be understood as a defence of corruption offenders, as corruption remains an extraordinary crime that harms state finances and the social and economic rights of society. The main problem lies in the absence of categorisation of losses to state finances or the national economy under positive law, which results in low-value corruption cases being processed through the formal criminal justice mechanism. This condition is related to Article 4 of Law Number 31 of 1999, which provides that restitution of state financial losses does not extinguish the offender’s criminal punishment. Law Number 1 of 2023 has regulated categories of criminal fines, but it has not established a nominal classification of state losses. This constraint is further reinforced by Article 82 letter c of Law Number 20 of 2025, which excludes corruption crimes from the Restorative Justice mechanism. This study aims to evaluate the urgency of legal reform and construct the Progressive-Economic-Utilitarian Justice Model as a prescriptive recommendation for the legislature. This study employs normative legal research, drawing on conceptual, philosophical, and comparative jurisdictional approaches. The findings show that processing micro-value corruption cases through the formal criminal justice mechanism may result in cumulative losses for the state, namely losses from the criminal offence and additional costs arising from disproportionate law enforcement. As a prescriptive solution, the Progressive-Economic-Utilitarian Justice Model requires limited reform of sentencing norms, a legal basis for the limited application of Restorative Justice, and the legalisation of a maximum state-loss threshold of IDR 50 million as the law as it ought to be (ius constituendum). This mechanism must be subject to restitution of at least 200% of the losses to state finances or the national economy caused by the offence to prevent impunity. Accordingly, the Progressive-Economic-Utilitarian Justice Model is directed as a strict loss-recovery mechanism to protect state finances and the social and economic rights of society.

Keywords: Economic Analysis of Law, Petty Corruption, Progressive Law, Restorative Justice, Utilitarianism

Article Metrics

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Adhim, M. S., Madjid, A., & Afandi, F. (2025). The Dynamics of Judicial Independence in Corruption Sentencing: Between Judicial Discretion and the Principle of Legal Certainty. Legal Horizons, 24(1), 63-72. https://doi.org/10.54477/lh.25192353.2025.1.pp.63-72

Ardiansyah, I., & Rustam, R. (2025). Restorative Justice for Corruptors: A Solution or a Legal Setback? Arena Hukum, 18(2), 287-312. https://doi.org/10.21776/ub.arenahukum2025.01802.6

Arsyad, N., Husen, L. O., Hasyim, S., & Muzakkir, A. K. (2026). The Nature of Mechanism for Enforcing the Ethics and Honor of State Administrators as a Preventive Measure for Corrupt Practices. Cogent Social Sciences, 12(1), 1-17. https://doi.org/10.1080/23311886.2026.2620142

Bentham, J. (2007). An Introduction to the Principles of Morals and Legislation. Dover Publications, Inc. https://books.google.co.id/books?id=GcnssaU-1wgC

Dhani, A., & Purba, D. O. (2025, November 22). Kasus Korupsi Kades Meningkat Tiap Tahun, Kejaksaan Agung Kewalahan. Kompas. Retrieved November 26, 2025, from https://regional.kompas.com/read/2025/11/22/130833678/kasus-korupsi-kades-meningkat-tiap-tahun-kejaksaan-agung-kewalahan

Habibullah, A. W., Muti’ah, D., & Sugiarsih, D. (2024). Restorative Justice Approach in Village Fund Corruption in Pamekasan Regency. In A. Ma’arif et al. (Eds.), Proceedings of the 2nd Biology Trunojoyo Madura International Conference (BTMIC 2024) (Volume 146, pp. 1-11). EDP Sciences. https://doi.org/10.1051/bioconf/202414601086

Herdiana, A. D. (2026). Procedural Law Dualism in Asset Forfeiture Regime: Conflict of Evidentiary Norms and Judicial Oversight Regarding Human Rights Protection. SIGn Jurnal Hukum, 7(2), 1146-1161. https://doi.org/10.37276/sjh.v7i2.625

Irmawanti, N. D., & Arief, B. N. (2021). Urgensi Tujuan dan Pedoman Pemidanaan dalam Rangka Pembaharuan Sistem Pemidanaan Hukum Pidana. Jurnal Pembangunan Hukum Indonesia, 3(2), 217-227. https://doi.org/10.14710/jphi.v3i2.217-227

Irwansyah. (2020). Penelitian Hukum: Pilihan Metode & Praktik Penulisan Artikel. Mirra Buana Media.

Kurniawan, K. D. (2025). New Strategies in Handling Corruption Cases Under 50 Million Rupiah: A Review of Non-Criminal Policies. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Law Reform (5th INCLAR 2024) (Vol. 870, pp. 207-213). Atlantis Press. https://doi.org/10.2991/978-2-38476-362-7_30

Lasmadi, S., & Sukma, A. N. A. (2025). Benefit-Based Corruption Eradication Policy: A Comparison Between Indonesia and the UK. Journal of Law and Legal Reform, 6(3), 1685-1722. https://doi.org/10.15294/jllr.v6i3.23406

Law of the Republic of Indonesia Number 31 of 1999 on the Eradication of Corruption Crimes (State Gazette of the Republic of Indonesia of 1999 Number 140, Supplement to the State Gazette of the Republic of Indonesia Number 3874). https://dpr.go.id/dokumen/jdih/undang-undang/detail/432

Law of the Republic of Indonesia Number 20 of 2001 on Amendment to Law Number 31 of 1999 on the Eradication of Corruption Crimes (State Gazette of the Republic of Indonesia of 2001 Number 134, Supplement to the State Gazette of the Republic of Indonesia Number 4150). https://dpr.go.id/dokumen/jdih/undang-undang/detail/351

Law of the Republic of Indonesia Number 1 of 2023 on the Penal Code (State Gazette of the Republic of Indonesia of 2023 Number 1, Supplement to the State Gazette of the Republic of Indonesia Number 6842). https://dpr.go.id/dokumen/jdih/undang-undang/detail/1818

Law of the Republic of Indonesia Number 20 of 2025 on the Criminal Procedure Code (State Gazette of the Republic of Indonesia of 2025 Number 188, Supplement to the State Gazette of the Republic of Indonesia Number 7149). https://dpr.go.id/dokumen/jdih/undang-undang/detail/2011

Mardin, N., Wulandari, S. L., & Kharismawan, A. (2025). Exploring the Role of Restorative Justice in the Recovery of State Finances from Corruption Crimes. Pena Justisia: Media Komunikasi dan Kajian Hukum, 24(1), 5461-5485. https://doi.org/10.31941/pj.v24i2.6194

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. Al-Jinayah: Jurnal Hukum Pidana Islam, 11(1), 62-76. https://doi.org/10.15642/aj.2025.11.1.62-76

Mauludin, T. S., Sulistiani, L., & Ramdan, A. (2024). Penyimpangan terhadap Pasal 5 Ayat (1) Huruf b dan c Peraturan Kejaksaaan Nomor 15 Tahun 2020 tentang Penghentian Penuntutan Berdasarkan Keadilan Restoratif terhadap Perkara yang Memiliki Kriteria/Keadaan yang Bersifat Kasuistik. Jurnal Hukum Lex Generalis, 5(7), 1-27. Retrieved from https://ojs.rewangrencang.com/index.php/jhlg/article/view/463

Novarina, A. (2026, January 6). Restorative Justice Excludes Corruption, Sexual Violence: Minister. Antara. Retrieved January 8, 2026, from https://en.antaranews.com/amp/news/398608

Pawe, T., Husen, L. O., & Muzakkir, A. K. (2025). The Paradox of a Rule of Law State: A Critical Reflection on the Dialectic between Discourse and Reality in the Eradication of Corruption in Indonesia. Sovereign: International Journal of Law, 7(1-2), 1-17. https://doi.org/10.37276/sijl.v7i1-2.56

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

Posner, R. A. (1980). The Ethical and Political Basis of the Efficiency Norm in Common Law Adjudication. Hofstra Law Review, 8(3), 487-507. Retrieved from https://scholarlycommons.law.hofstra.edu/hlr/vol8/iss3/2

Posner, R. A. (2007). Economic Analysis of Law (Seventh Edition). Wolters Kluwer Law & Business. https://books.google.co.id/books?id=ooFDAQAAIAAJ

Pradiptyo, R. (2012, September 17). Does Corruption Pay in Indonesia? If So, Who are Benefited the Most? (MPRA Paper No. 41384). Munich Personal RePEc Archive. https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/41384

Pudjoharsoyo, A. S. (2026, January 2). Status Keberlakuan PERMA 1/2020 Setelah KUHP Nasional Berlaku. MARINews. Retrieved January 8, 2026, from https://marinews.mahkamahagung.go.id/artikel/status-perma-12020-setelah-kuhp-nasional-berlaku-0JZ

Qamar, N., & Rezah, F. S. (2020). Metode Penelitian Hukum: Doktrinal dan Non-Doktrinal. CV. Social Politic Genius (SIGn). https://books.google.co.id/books?id=TAQHEAAAQBAJ

Radbruch, G. (2006). Statutory Lawlessness and Supra-Statutory Law (1946). Oxford Journal of Legal Studies, 26(1), 1-11. https://doi.org/10.1093/ojls/gqi041

Rahardjo, S. (2005). Hukum Progresif: Hukum yang Membebaskan. Jurnal Hukum Progresif, 1(1), 1-24. Retrieved from https://ejournal.undip.ac.id/index.php/hukum_progresif/article/view/1009

Rahardjo, S. (2007). Biarkan Hukum Mengalir: Catatan Kritis tentang Pergulatan Manusia dan Hukum. Kompas. https://books.google.co.id/books?id=6mQBLPJtWWgC

Regulation of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Indonesia Number 1 of 2020 on Sentencing Guidelines for Article 2 and Article 3 of Law on the Eradication of Corruption Crimes (Bulletin Gazette of the Republic of Indonesia of 2020 Number 832). https://peraturan.go.id/id/peraturan-ma-no-1-tahun-2020

Sampara, S., & Husen, L. O. (2016). Metode Penelitian Hukum. Kretakupa Print.

Sandhy, A. P., & Panjaitan, H. (2026). The Cost Burden Paradox in Petty Corruption Enforcement: A Socio-Legal Study Based on Cost-Awareness. SIGn Jurnal Hukum, 7(2), 1058-1077. https://doi.org/10.37276/sjh.v7i2.564

Setiyowati, D., Ayub, A. F., & Dwipayana, I. K. D. (2024). Indeks Perilaku Anti Korupsi 2024 (Volume 8). Badan Pusat Statistik Republik Indonesia. https://bps.go.id/id/publication/2024/12/06/66e636bc0a8fa4f90e0d6c6d

Suhartono, A., & Panjaitan, H. (2025). Normative Reconstruction of Asset Forfeiture: A Legal Pathway Following Demise of Corruption Suspects. SIGn Jurnal Hukum, 7(2), 682-707. https://doi.org/10.37276/sjh.v7i2.511

Sutopo, R. B. P., & Panjaitan, H. (2025). A Juridical Demarcation: Reconstructing the Proof of Mens Rea to Differentiate Policy and Corruption by Public Officials. SIGn Jurnal Hukum, 7(2), 765-784. https://doi.org/10.37276/sjh.v7i2.525

Syah, Z. A. (2025, September 30). Laporan Hasil Pemantauan Tren Korupsi Tahun 2024. Indonesia Corruption Watch. Retrieved November 22, 2025, from https://icw.or.id/ZHmn

Published
2026-06-17
How to Cite
Sandhy, A. P., Pieris, J., Tehupeiory, A., & Panjaitan, H. (2026). Policy Reconstruction in Combating Petty Corruption: Towards Progressive, Economic, and Utilitarian Justice. SIGn Jurnal Hukum, 8(1), 275-292. https://doi.org/10.37276/sjh.v8i1.701