Email this article 
Hide
Show all
AUTHORITY OF SUPERVISORY APPARATUS INTERNAL GOVERNMENT OR APIP IN DETERMINING STATE LOSSES DUE TO CORRUPTION IN LOCAL GOVERNMENT INSTITUTIONS
Abstract
This time, there is often debate between two financial supervisory institutions, namely between APIP (Supervisory Apparatus Internal Government) and BPK (Financial Audit Institutions) relating to the existence of the same authority in these two supervisory institutions. This authority is related to the calculation of state losses as regulated in Decision of the Constitutional Court No. 31 / PUUX / 2012 related to testing Law No. 30 of 2002 concerning the Corruption Eradication Commission or the KPK against the Indonesia Constitution 1945 or UUD 1945. The decision states that the KPK can not only coordinate with the BPK and BPKP (Supervisory Financial and Development) in terms of proof of corruption but can also coordinate with other agencies, it can even prove itself apart from the findings of the BKP and BPKP. Based on this background, the problem in this research is how is the authority of APIP in calculating state losses due to corruption in Local Government agencies? The problem approach in this research is normative legal research, normatively is the approach by collecting and studying, documents, and applicable laws and regulations, which are related to the determination of state losses by APIP.
The results of the research shows that based on Article 50 paragraph (1) of Government Regulation Number 60 Year 2008 concerning Government Internal Control Systems, APIP can conduct audits with specific objectives in order to calculate the state losses due to corruption. However, in calculating state losses, APIP must get a request from the legal apparatus first as stated in the cooperation agreement made by the Inspectorate and BPKP as APIP. Based on these rules, APIP only has a mandate from the legal apparatus so that the audit results of the APIP is informative and do not constitute a state administration decision. Therefore based on the Supreme Court Circular No. 4 of 2016 concerning the Imposition of the 2016 Supreme Court Chamber Room Plenary Meeting Results as a guideline for the implementation of duties for the court, APIP is only authorized to calculate state losses and can only determine state losses by BPK.
Keywords
Full Text:
PDFReferences
Badan Pemeriksan Keuangan Republik Indonesia, Standar Pemeriksaan Keuangan Negara, Jakarta: Badan Pemeriksan Keuangan Republik Indonesia, 2017. Dumaria Simanjuntak, “Pengisian Jabatan Anggota Badan Pemeriksa Keuangan (BPK) Untuk Mewujudkan BPK yang Independen”, Jurnal Hukum dan Pembangunan, Vol. 47 No.2, 2017 Dwi Alfianto, “Peran Aparat Pengawas Intern Pemerintah (APIP) Untuk Mewujudkan Good Governance Dalam Pencegahan Tindak Pidana Korupsi di Bidang Penyediaan Barang dan Jasa”, Hukum Pidana dan Pembangunan Hukum, Vol.1 No.2, 2019. https://nasional.kompas.com/read/2019/04/28/20144391/icw-pegawai-pemda-pelaku-korupsi-terbanyak-pada-tahun-2018 Mieke Rayu Raba, “Peran Badan Pemeriksa Keuangan (BPK) dalam Melakukan Pemeriksaan Terhadap Pengelolaan Keuangan Negara Untuk Mewujudkan Pemerintahan yang Baik Menurut Uu No. 15 Tahun 2006”, Lex Crimen, Vol. 6 No. 3, 2017. Muhammad Fadel Noerman, “Hubungan Hasil Pengawasan Apip dan BPK Dalam Rangka Audit Dengan Tujuan Tertentu Dalam Akuntabilitas Keuangan Daerah”, Tesis Program Studi Magister Ilmu Hukum Fakultas Hukum Universitas Lampung, 2017. R. Bayu Ferdian, Mohd. Din, M. Gaussyah, “Penetapan Kerugian Negara Dalam Perkara Tindak Pidana Korupsi”, Syiah Kuala Law Journal, Vol. 2 No.3, 2018. Rita Novita Sari, “Penghitungan Kerugian Keuangan Negara Oleh BPKP Sebagai Keputusan Tata Usaha Negara (Analisis Putusan Mahkamah Agung Nomor 75 PK/TUN/2015”, Skripsi. Fakultas Hukum Universitas Lampung, 2016. Utami Dewi, “Kedudukan Badan Pemeriksa Keuangan dan Pembangunan (BPKP) dalam Penentuan Unsur Kerugian Keuangan Negara dalam Kaitanya Dengan Optimalisasi Pengawasan Pengelolaan Keuangan Daerah (Studi Kasus di Kalimantan Barat)”, Jurnal Nestor Magister Hukum, Vol. 4 No.4, 2017. Attachment to the Regulation of the Minister of Home Affairs of the Republic of Indonesia Number 35 of 2018 on the Policy for Supervision of Regional Government Administration in 2019 Indonesia Constitution 1945 Law No. 15 of 2006 on Financial Audit Institutions Law Number 1 of 2004 on State Treasury Law Number 30 of 2014 on Government Administration
Refbacks
- There are currently no refbacks.
Copyright (c) 2020 Tadulako Law Review
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.