Economic Efficiency Versus Legal Dogmatics: A Critical Analysis of Restorative Justice for Indonesian Petty Corruption
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.15575/kh.v8i1.54236Keywords:
Cost Efficiency, petty corruption, restorative justice, retributive law enforcement, summary proceedingsAbstract
The normalization of petty corruption in Indonesia poses a significant sociological and institutional challenge, as evidenced by high rates of public participation in gratification. Paradoxically, law enforcement officials frequently respond to this phenomenon through a pragmatic discourse advocating restorative justice to achieve budgetary efficiency. This research aims to critically evaluate this cost efficiency argument by analyzing the normative and sociological implications of resolving corruption offenses through non-penal mechanisms. Utilizing a normative legal research methodology encompassing statutory, conceptual, and case approaches, this study examines the tension between empirical case handling expenditures and foundational rule of law principles. The findings reveal that the substantial disparity between enforcement expenditures and recovered state assets does not provide a sufficient legal basis to justify the decriminalization of corruption. Law enforcement costs represent a core constitutional function that cannot be reduced to a profit oriented calculation. Sociologically, implementing peaceful resolution mechanisms within a high tolerance society creates a significant risk of institutionalizing impunity and may encourage the collective imitation of corrupt behavior. Furthermore, a dogmatic reconstruction affirms that Article 4 of Law Number 31 of 1999 and Article 82 letter c of Law Number 20 of 2025 explicitly exclude corruption offenses from extrajudicial resolutions, as the inherent mens rea element cannot be nullified by mere asset restitution. Consequently, this research concludes that addressing this challenge requires prioritizing a summary proceedings mechanism alongside the modernization of digital prevention systems. This integrated approach ensures legal certainty, maintains the deterrent effect of criminal law, and safeguards institutional integrity without compromising procedural efficiency.
References
Adon, M. J., Riyanto, F. A., Pandor, P., & Mangisengi, A. (2022). Implications of the Drama of Jesus’ Passion Story in the Gospel of John for the Ethics of the Political Elite in the Public Sphere. Religious: Jurnal Studi Agama-Agama Dan Lintas Budaya, 6(2), 231–242. https://doi.org/10.15575/rjsalb.v6i2.16364
Andini, O. G., Nilasari, N., & Eurian, A. A. (2023). Restorative justice in Indonesia corruption crime: A utopia. Legality: Jurnal Ilmiah Hukum, 31(1), 72–90. https://doi.org/10.22219/ljih.v31i1.24247
Angelucci, C., & Russo, A. (2022). Petty corruption and citizen reports. International Economic Review, 63(2), 831–848. https://doi.org/10.1111/iere.12567
Anggrainy, F. C. (2022, January 27). Jaksa Agung sebut koruptor di bawah Rp50 juta cukup balikin kerugian negara. Detik News. https://news.detik.com/berita/d-5916956/jaksa-agung-sebut-koruptor-di-bawah-rp-50-juta-cukup-balikin-kerugian-negara
Baez-Camargo, C., Bukuluki, P., Sambaiga, R., Gatwa, T., Kassa, S., & Stahl, C. (2020). Petty corruption in the public sector: A comparative study of three East African countries through a behavioural lens. African Studies, 79(2), 232–249. https://doi.org/10.1080/00020184.2020.1803729
Behuku, J. G., Kusuma, J. I., Chasanah, N. U., Sugianto, F., & Indradewi, A. A. (2025). The judge’s role in the effectiveness of anti-corruption enforcement in Indonesia: A juridical analysis. SIGn Jurnal Hukum, 7(1), 351–367. https://doi.org/10.37276/sjh.v7i1.464
Brierley, S., & Pereira, M. M. (2023). Women bureaucrats and petty corruption: Experimental evidence from Ghana. Research & Politics, 10(1), 1–7. https://doi.org/10.1177/20531680231161161
Budiman, B. (2020). Profit Management and Islamic Business Ethics. International Journal of Islamic Khazanah, 10(2), 95–104. https://doi.org/10.15575/ijik.v10i2.12032
Carreras, M., Vera, S., & Visconti, G. (2024). Gender stereotypes and petty corruption among street-level bureaucrats: Evidence from a conjoint experiment. Research & Politics, 11(3), 1–7. https://doi.org/10.1177/20531680241277405
Chistyakova, Y., Wall, D. S., & Bonino, S. (2021). The back-door governance of crime: Confiscating criminal assets in the UK. European Journal on Criminal Policy and Research, 27(4), 495–515. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10610-019-09423-5
Faharuddin, R., & Hakim, J. (2023). Restorative justice for corruption cases the settlement of corruption cases: Is it possible? Yuridika, 38(1), 73–94. https://doi.org/10.20473/ydk.v38i1.42511
Fathurrohman, R., Anna, D. N., Sibawaihi, S., & Fahmi, M. Z. (2024). Framing Religious Hoaxes: Logical, Religious, and Legal Perspectives in Indonesia. Religious: Jurnal Studi Agama-Agama Dan Lintas Budaya, 8(2), 141–156. https://doi.org/10.15575/rjsalb.v8i2.15545
Goel, R. K., & Nelson, M. A. (2025). Cash versus digital payments in the public and private sectors: Effects on petty versus grand corruption. Public Choice, 1–30. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11127-025-01352-8
Handoyo, S. (2018). The Role of Public Governance in Environmental Sustainability. Jurnal Ilmiah Peuradeun, 6(2), 161-178. https://doi.org/10.26811/peuradeun.v6i2.255
Hanoteau, J., Pawitan, G., & Vial, V. (2021). Does social capital reduce entrepreneurs’ petty corruption? Evidence across Indonesian regions. Papers in Regional Science, 100(3), 651–671. https://doi.org/10.1111/pirs.12588
Heathershaw, J., & Mayne, T. (2023). Explaining suspicious wealth: Legal enablers, transnational kleptocracy, and the failure of the UK’s unexplained wealth orders. Journal of International Relations and Development, 26(2), 301–323. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41268-023-00296-0
Irwansyah. (2020). Penelitian hukum: Pilihan metode & praktik penulisan artikel. Mirra Buana Media.
Isiaka, O. A. (2025). Examining the effectiveness of restorative justice as an alternative approach to traditional punitive measures in handling corruption cases. African Journal of Law, Political Research and Administration, 8(1), 102–110. https://doi.org/10.52589/ajlpra-hpq3o5qu
Juwita, R. (2023). A human rights-based approach to combating corruption in the education sector in Indonesia. Asia-Pacific Journal on Human Rights and the Law, 24(2), 230–265. https://doi.org/10.1163/15718158-24020002
Kurniawan, K. D. (2025). New strategies in handling corruption cases under 50 million rupiah: A review of non-criminal policies. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Law Reform (5th INCLAR 2024) (Vol. 870, pp. 207–213). Atlantis Press. https://doi.org/10.2991/978-2-38476-362-7_30
Kustanti, A., Yuliati, Y., & Purnomo, M. (2023). Institutionalization of corrupt activities among Indonesian rural household farmers in surround marginal teak forest areas. Cogent Social Sciences, 9(1), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1080/23311886.2023.2187008
Lantara, I. W. N. (2025). Understanding attitudes toward corruption in Indonesia: Regional disparities and the role of education. International Journal of Asia Pacific Studies, 21(2), 1–25. https://doi.org/10.21315/ijaps2025.21.2.1
Lasmadi, S., & Sudarti, E. (2021). Restorative justice as an alternative for the settlement of corruption crimes the adverse state finances in the perspective of the purpose of conviction. Jurnal IUS Kajian Hukum dan Keadilan, 9(2), 287–298. https://doi.org/10.29303/ius.v9i2.904
Law of the Republic of Indonesia Number 1 of 2023 on the Penal Code, State Gazette of the Republic of Indonesia of 2023 Number 1, Supplement to the State Gazette of the Republic of Indonesia Number 6842. https://www.dpr.go.id/dokumen/jdih/undang-undang/detail/1818
Law of the Republic of Indonesia Number 20 of 2001 on Amendment to Law Number 31 of 1999 on the Eradication of Corruption Crimes, State Gazette of the Republic of Indonesia of 2001 Number 134, Supplement to the State Gazette of the Republic of Indonesia Number 4150. https://www.dpr.go.id/dokumen/jdih/undang-undang/detail/351
Law of the Republic of Indonesia Number 20 of 2025 on the Criminal Procedure Code, State Gazette of the Republic of Indonesia of 2025 Number 188, Supplement to the State Gazette of the Republic of Indonesia Number 7149. https://www.dpr.go.id/dokumen/jdih/undang-undang/detail/2011
Law of the Republic of Indonesia Number 31 of 1999 on the Eradication of Corruption Crimes, State Gazette of the Republic of Indonesia of 1999 Number 140, Supplement to the State Gazette of the Republic of Indonesia Number 3874. https://www.dpr.go.id/dokumen/jdih/undang-undang/detail/432
Luqman, L. (2025, January 25). Hasil riset nasional AILG. Airlangga Institute for Learning and Growth. https://ailg.unair.ac.id/2025/01/25/launching-airlangga-institute-for-learning-and-growth
Marlina, A., Karauwan, D. E. S., Juanedy, A., & Ramadhani, A. (2025). The urgency of reformulating the handling of petty corruption through a peaceful fine scheme in Indonesia. Al-Jinayah: Jurnal Hukum Pidana Islam, 11(1), 62–76. https://doi.org/10.15642/aj.2025.11.1.62-76
Marta, A., Suwaryo, U., Sulaeman, A., & Agustino, L. (2020). The Crisis of Democratic Governance in Contemporary Indonesia. Jurnal Ilmiah Peuradeun, 8(1), 109-128. https://doi.org/10.26811/peuradeun.v8i1.368
Masrom, S., Rahman, R. A., Salleh, N. A., Pitaloka, E., Nor, M. A. M., & Zakaria, N. B. (2023). Machine learning prediction of petty corruption intention among law enforcement officers. Indonesian Journal of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science, 30(3), 1634–1642. https://doi.org/10.11591/ijeecs.v30.i3.pp1634-1642
Miao, C., & Brewster, C. (2026). Exploring one of the darker sides of expatriation: Chinese expatriates’ experiences with petty corruption in Tanzania. International Business Review, 35(1), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ibusrev.2025.102530
Muttaqi, N. I. N. (2023). The relevance of applying restorative justice concept in corruption cases with relatively small state financial losses. Delictum: Jurnal Hukum Pidana Islam, 2(1), 57–74. https://doi.org/10.35905/delictum.v2i1.5166
Nieto-Morales, F., Peeters, R., & Lotta, G. (2024). Burdens, bribes, and bureaucrats: The political economy of petty corruption and administrative burdens. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 34(4), 481–497. https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/muae010
Pawe, T., Husen, L. O., & Muzakkir, A. K. (2025). The paradox of a rule of law state: A critical reflection on the dialectic between discourse and reality in the eradication of corruption in Indonesia. Sovereign: International Journal of Law, 7(1–2), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.37276/sijl.v7i1-2.56
Posner, R. A. (2007). Economic analysis of law (7th ed.). Wolters Kluwer Law & Business. https://books.google.co.id/books?id=ooFDAQAAIAAJ
Pramono, M. F., Jasmine, A. N., Naz, S., Manaf, H. A., & Mutiarin, D. (2026). Repositioning Oligarchy and Democratic Governance: Institutional Reform in Indonesia. Jurnal Ilmiah Peuradeun, 14(1), 123-150. https://doi.org/10.26811/peuradeun.v14i1.2516
Qamar, N., & Rezah, F. S. (2020). Metode penelitian hukum: Doktrinal dan non-doktrinal. CV. Social Politic Genius (SIGn). https://books.google.co.id/books?id=TAQHEAAAQBAJ
Romero, D. (2025). Unpacking bribery: Petty corruption and favor exchanges. Latin American Politics and Society, 67(2), 36–59. https://doi.org/10.1017/lap.2024.50
Rompegading, A. M. (2022). Deterrence and eradication of gratification crime. SIGn Jurnal Hukum, 3(2), 151–162. https://doi.org/10.37276/sjh.v3i2.161
Sadik-Zada, E. R., Gatto, A., & Niftiyev, I. (2024). E-government and petty corruption in public sector service delivery. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 36(12), 3987–4003. https://doi.org/10.1080/09537325.2022.2067037
Sambo, U., & Sule, B. (2021). Strategies of Combating Corruption in Nigeria: The Islamic Perspective. International Journal of Islamic Khazanah, 11(1), 12–28. https://doi.org/10.15575/ijik.v11i1.10813
Sampara, S., & Husen, L. O. (2016). Metode penelitian hukum. Kretakupa Print.
Sari, T. G. P. (2025). Reformulating the boundaries of freies ermessen: An analysis of conflict of norms in the Government Administration Law post-enactment of the Job Creation Law. SIGn Jurnal Hukum, 7(2), 901–916. https://doi.org/10.37276/sjh.v7i2.546
Suhartono, A., & Panjaitan, H. (2025). Normative reconstruction of asset forfeiture: A legal pathway following demise of corruption suspects. SIGn Jurnal Hukum, 7(2), 682–707. https://doi.org/10.37276/sjh.v7i2.511
Sukarno, M., Rodriguez, M. J., & Nursamsiyah, N. (2024). E-government development on control corruption: A lesson learned from Singapore. Journal of Governance and Public Policy, 11(3), 271–286. https://doi.org/10.18196/jgpp.v11i3.21447
Sutopo, R. B. P., & Panjaitan, H. (2025). A juridical demarcation: Reconstructing the proof of mens rea to differentiate policy and corruption by public officials. SIGn Jurnal Hukum, 7(2), 765–784. https://doi.org/10.37276/sjh.v7i2.525
Syah, Z. A. (2025, September 30). Laporan hasil pemantauan tren korupsi tahun 2024. Indonesia Corruption Watch. https://icw.or.id/ZHmn
Syahird, A., Musakkir, M., Ilyas, A., & Naswar, N. (2024). Restorative justice approach as ultimum remedium of corruption crimes. Pakistan Journal of Criminology, 16(3), 949–962. https://doi.org/10.62271/pjc.16.3.949.962
Umam, A. K. (2021). Understanding the influence of vested interests on politics of anti-corruption in Indonesia. Asian Journal of Political Science, 29(3), 255–273. https://doi.org/10.1080/02185377.2021.1979061
Veqar Ashraf-Khan, M., & Shahadat Hossain, M. (2021). Governance: Exploring the Islamic Approach and its Relevance for the Modern Context. International Journal of Islamic Khazanah, 11(1), 29–40. https://doi.org/10.15575/ijik.v11i1.10433
Wulandari, A., Fitriawan, R. A., Nugroho, C., Nurdiarti, R. P., Nastain, M., & Nasionalita, K. (2024). Indonesia’s women: Corruption is a normal thing (Survey of women’s perception of corruption in Indonesia). Sage Open, 14(2), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1177/21582440241259956
Zainal, Z., & Zeriand, D. (2022). Good Governance in Corporate Social Responsibility (C.S.R.) Program at Siak Regency. Jurnal Ilmiah Peuradeun, 10(3), 763-782. https://doi.org/10.26811/peuradeun.v10i3.706
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Nasrullah Arsyad, Satrih Hasyim
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under  Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgment of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgment of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).