Wahyu Wiriadinata


Full Text:



This paper, entitled Corruption and Reversal Burden of Proof, was intended to deal with a question on the extent of the effectiveness of a reversal burden of proof as stipulated in positive (applicable)
Indonesia law, that is, as provided for in Law Number 31 of 1999 on Eradication of Corruption Crime.
Then, a problem that rose next was: could the application of reversal burden of proof in proving a corruption crime case prevent or reduce or even eliminate totally corruption crimes in Indonesia?
This research built on a theoretical frame of thought from Roscoe Pound, who maintains that law is a tool of social engineering. This concept was cited by Muchtar Kusumaatmadja, who adapted
it to Indonesia conditions and adjusted it to be law as a social engineering medium. Engineering is meant here as a transformation of the thinking ways of people from traditional thinking ways to modern ones. Law should be made as a means in resolving the entire problems that emerge between and among community, including corruption crimes. One of the things that needs to be changed is a law of proof law system, that is, from a conventional proof system to be a reversal one. This paper
was written by a juridical-normative method, that is, by studying legislations, be they are contained in laws and those contained in literature/books on legal science, particularly legislations related to reversal burden of proof. Then, the results, in a form of juridical aspect, was written in a descriptiveanalytical form. The overall conclusion of this research was an answer of the problems posed above, that is: Corruption crimes have been continuously occurring till now in Indonesia. Thus, Law Number 31 of 1999, particularly Article 37, has not been effective yet in eradicating corruption crimes.


Corruption, reversal burden of proof, limited reversal burden of proof.

Creative Commons License
Indonesian Journal of International Law is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.