Validity of police discretion regarding termination of corruption investigations post-refund of state financial damages
Yesi Arfianto, Widodo Tresno Novianto
This research is based on the discretion of the Police in the form of a Secret Telegram Letter from the Criminal Investigation Department No. 206/VII/2016 (STR 206/VII/2016) which includes the termination of investigations into criminal acts of corruption after the return of state financial losses, which in its implementation contains pros and cons. Furthermore, this paper aims to see the validity of STR 206/VII/2016. This research is a normative legal research, with a case approach and a statutory approach. The results showed that the STR Kabareskrim No. 206/VII/2016 substantially has no basis for validity, this is because the STR does not meet the prerequisites for taking police discretionary actions as regulated in Article 18 of the Police Law which requires that every discretionary action by the police have a clear urgency (in the Police Law it is called a state of urgency). and for the sake of the public interest, where throughout the author's search, neither of these two things were found in the arguments for the formation of STR 206/VII/2016. Furthermore, the discretion of the police must pay attention to the provisions of laws and regulations where in the case of establishing STR 206/VII/2016 only consider the directives of the President and the National Police Chief and override the spirit of eradicating corruption in the Anti-Corruption Law.