ANALISA YURIDIS PUTUSAN PENINJAUAN KEMBALI NOMOR : 217 PK/PID.SUS/2015 ATAS NAMA TERPIDANA H. YULIUS NAWAWI BIN NAWAWI ALHAJ

Abstract

The judicial review decision by the Supreme Court will be very different from the final decision that has been executed, both for imprisonment, fines, execution of evidence, as well as additional criminal executions in the form of payment of compensation in cases of corruption. In this study, samples were taken from the return to convicts of money in lieu of corruption cases in the form of state revenues that had been deposited through the state treasury at the Ogan Komering Ulu District Attorney. With the formulation of the problem, namely: (1) How is the implementation / execution of the return to the convict? (2) What are the Constraints in implementation/execution? (3) What is the criminal law policy regarding the implementation/execution in the future? By using empirical normative research methods, the results obtained are (1) In the execution of refunds in the case of corruption in the Ogan Komering Ulu District Attorney’s Office, the Ogan Komering Ulu District Attorney’s Office has carried out well; (2) During the process of returning the money back that has been entered into the state treasury in the form of State Revenue, the problem lies in not stipulating a deadline or time limit related to the payment process which makes the transfer of funds to the defendant slow. In the Regulation of the Minister of Finance of the Republic of Indonesia Number: 96/PMK.05/2017 concerning Payment Procedures for Returning State Revenue Transactions, it is also not explained in this regard; (3) Based on the results of the research, the authors hope that in the future it should be added and clarified again in a Supreme Court Regulation, Attorney General Regulation, Minister of Finance Regulation or Minister of Home Affairs Regulation regarding the role of each institution so that public services as justice seekers are getting better. The cases that the writer is examining are rare or new to occur in Indonesia, therefore it is necessary to improve or clarify the regulations relating to refunds to convicts who have paid replacement money which turns out that after the application for judicial review is received, it turns out that the replacement money is abolished and must returned to the convict.

Keywords: Judicial Review, Reimbursement, State Revenue, Prosecut