DPR Legislative Body Chair Highlights Attorney General's Circular on State Loss Calculation Agencies
The Chairman of the Legislative Body (Baleg) of the Indonesian House of Representatives (DPR RI), Bob Hasan, has highlighted a discrepancy in the interpretation of which institutions are authorised to calculate state losses in corruption criminal cases. This discrepancy involves a clash between formalist and progressive perspectives regarding the authority to calculate state losses in relation to Articles 2 and 3 of the Anti-Corruption Law.
Recent Constitutional Court (MK) Decision Number 28 has sparked new discourse in corruption law enforcement. The decision asserts that there is a single authority for calculating state losses, namely the Audit Board of Indonesia (BPK). The Court’s view is that this aligns with the explanation in Article 603 of the new Criminal Code (KUHP), which states that state losses are based on the audit results of a ‘state financial auditing institution’, specifically the BPK.
However, in response to this Constitutional Court ruling, the Attorney General’s Office (Kejagung) has issued a new Circular (SE) stating that the authority to calculate state losses in corruption cases is not exclusive to the BPK. The circular suggests that other institutions, such as the Financial and Development Supervisory Agency (BPKP) and public accountants, are also legally authorised to perform these calculations.
Bob Hasan stated that certainty regarding the authority for calculating state losses is essential to guarantee legal certainty and justice. Speaking during a Public Hearing (RDPU) at the DPR RI Nusantara I Building in Senayan, Jakarta, on Monday, he noted that the spirit of the new Criminal Code involves addressing state financial losses or reductions.
Consequently, the DPR Legislative Body deems it necessary to invite legal experts to dissect this legal dualism and disparity in interpretation. Bob Hasan added that the academic perspective of Professor Romli Atmasasmura is expected to strengthen the study of the debate between the formalist and progressive camps following Constitutional Court Decision Number 28.
He emphasised that such conditions must not lead to multiple interpretations in law enforcement practices, as the Constitutional Court ruling was intended to establish a single, unified authority. Furthermore, Bob Hasan reaffirmed that the Legislative Body continues to monitor the implementation of the BPK Law, particularly Article 10, Paragraph (1), which asserts that the BPK is the sole institution authorised to determine state losses based on unlawful acts.