ARCHIVES
VOL. 10, ISSUE 4 (2024)
Disparity of prison sentence and substitutional money for corruption convicts
Authors
Tari Endah Guntari, Rizanizarli, Insa Ansari
Abstract
The provision of a substitute money sentence can cause new problems if
the convict is unable to pay the substitute money within a certain period.
Therefore, the Public Prosecutor in his indictment and charges charges the
defendant with a substitute prison sentence if the person concerned is unable
to pay the substitute money, where the prison sentence does not exceed the
maximum threat of the principal sentence. Furthermore, the Panel of Judges
considers the facts revealed in the trial to pass a verdict for the Defendant.
In imposing the length of the substitute money sentence, a disparity was found
due to the absence of a reference in formulating the substitute money sentence
not paid within the specified period. The disparity in sentences is also often
associated with the independence of judges who refer to the sentencing model
regulated in laws and regulations, especially regarding the formulation of
maximum criminal sanctions. Article 5 paragraph (1) of Law Number 48 of 2009
concerning Judicial Power emphasizes that judges are required to explore,
follow, and understand legal values and a sense of justice in society.
Therefore, judges cannot be intervened by any party.
Download
Pages:251-255
How to cite this article:
Tari Endah Guntari, Rizanizarli, Insa Ansari "Disparity of prison sentence and substitutional money for corruption convicts". International Journal of Law, Vol 10, Issue 4, 2024, Pages 251-255
Download Author Certificate
Please enter the email address corresponding to this article submission to download your certificate.