Knowledge Management: Guidelines for Criminalization based on

Analysis of Disparities in the Results of Corruption Criminal Decisions

Hary Budiarto

and Miswanto

Institute Bussiness and Technology (BRI Institute), Jakarta, Indonesia

Magister Computer Science, STMIK Nusa Mandiri, Jakarta, Indonesia

Keywords:

Corruption cases, Knowledge Management, Information System Application, Punishment result.

Abstract:

The disparity in punishment results of the corruption criminal decision has become a hot topic among aca-

demics, observers and law practitioners in Indonesia. Many people think that the disparities in punishment

results of corruption criminal will be contradiction to the efforts of eradicate corruption which is currently be-

ing carried out by the Government. In particular, the disparity in the conviction of the results of this decision

is often discussed in a more speciﬁc context and is considered reasonable because the difference in decisions

between one, two or more cases that have the same characteristics is the domain of Judge discretion. The

concept of criminal disparity nowadays doesn’t have a main guideline that can be used as a joint guideline

in determining whether disparity in criminality is in accordance with or not with the Circular of the Attorney

General Number 3 of 2010 concerning Guidelines for Criminal Lawsuits in Corruption. In practice, there are

still many disparities that occur in the results of corruption convictions throughout Indonesia in the range of

2011-2015. To make it easier for Judges to determine a decision by considering the Attorney General Number

3 of 2010 approach and also the results of a conviction for corruption which has been legal force within the

range of 2011-2015 requires a kind of Knowledge Management Application on the Disparity Study of Corrup-

tion Criminal Decision Results. Besides making it easier to classify according to the level of State Losses and

State Losses Return, this Knowledge Management in the future can be used as a Supporting Guide for Judges

and Prosecutors to be able to see the results of decisions in previous years.

1 INTRODUCTION

Efforts to eradicate corruption in Indonesia have be-

come less than optimal with the disparity in criminal

conviction in the case of corruption, it should be by

implementing guidelines for criminal prosecution of

corruption such as the Circular of the Attorney Gen-

eral Number: 003 of 2010, can be more effective in

minimizing the occurrence of disparities in prosecu-

tors conveying large demands and judges can provide

decisions for criminal sanctions cases of corruption.

However, this has not been realized until now because

there are still many criminal disparities in corruption

cases (Anugerah Rizki Akbari, 2018).

Verdict of Corruption cases through a court deci-

sion, should be able to minimize disparity in criminal

sanctions and not ease criminal sanctions for corrup-

tors. This is due to the existing criminal code guide-

lines, which have not been able to reduce the subjec-

tivity of judges in deciding cases of corruption and the

potential for judges to make judicial discretion in the

form of disparity in crimes which cannot be justiﬁed.

So we need a Knowledge Management as a guideline

for criminal law enforcement in Indonesia for Judge

and Prosecutor.

Corruption criminal is an extraordinary crime, be-

cause it not only damages the economy but also vi-

olates the human rights inherent in each individual.

To eradicate Corruption is countered by extra ordi-

nary acts (Rukmini, 2006), the disparity of Corrup-

tion Court decisions that cannot be accounted well

can cause public distrust in the law enforcement of

Corruption and cause inconsistencies in the judicial

environment.

At present to overcome the disparity in prosecu-

tion of corruption cases, there are Guidelines for Pros-

ecution related to Corruption, which must be used

as a reference by the Public Prosecutor in determin-

ing criminal charges against perpetrators of corrup-

tion. These guidelines are listed in the Attorney Gen-

eral’s Circular Letter Number: 003 of 2010. In the

guidelines of the circular letter is given a guide to

278

Budiarto, H. and Miswanto, .

Knowledge Management: Guidelines for Criminalization based on Analysis of Disparities in the Results of Corruption Criminal Decisions.

DOI: 10.5220/0009909102780285

In Proceedings of the International Conferences on Information System and Technology (CONRIST 2019), pages 278-285

ISBN: 978-989-758-453-4

make criminal charges against convicted corruption

with clause 2 paragraph 1 and clause 3 which are the

focus of the crime of corruption.

Figure 1: General Description of Disparity

This research will develop a Knowledge Manage-

ment System to resolve the problem of disparity the

results of lawsuits in corruption cases based on Deci-

sion Results data for the period of 2011 to 2015. The

data consists of 31 ﬁelds and 713 records of data on

corruption decisions that enter the realm of the Attor-

ney General’s Ofﬁce and also the Corruption Eradica-

tion Commission (KPK) that has been legal force as a

database of this Knowledge Management application.

Knowledge Management System is something

that must be built and developed in order to follow

the development of technology and knowledge. The

Knowledge Management function will be able to as-

sist the organization or institution in providing em-

ployees with proper understanding and knowledge,

both directly and indirectly. This Knowledge Man-

agement (KM) can be generally useful as internal e-

learning for employees and is particularly useful as a

source of knowledge in organizations or institutions

(Kusuma, 2013).

There are some researchers who have developed

knowledge management such as java applications,

mobile application and web services or e-learning ap-

plication that aim as a tool to clarify or provide valid

information to be presented to end user. There is

a research with entitled ”The Study of the Applica-

tion of SECI-based Knowledge Management System

in E-Mobile format: Case Study of Indraprasta Uni-

versity PGRI” (Yudha, 2015). In this research, the

concept and design of an e-mobilebased Knowledge

Management System was made as an alternative in

handling learning for students and lecturers who were

just teaching Java courses. In this system, the appli-

cation of e-mobile-based Knowledge Management is

built using the SECI Model approach.

And for Disparity and Law Decision for corrup-

tion cases was already research by Indonesian Judi-

cial Monitoring Society Research Team - Faculty of

Law, University of Indonesia (Anugerah Rizki Ak-

bari, 2018) , with a research entitled ”Resume of

Criminal Disparity Research in Corruption Cases”.

This research provides information and some exam-

ples of cases of criminal disparities that occur in the

realm of the Attorney General’s Ofﬁce of the Repub-

lic of Indonesia. In their research also explained Dis-

parities that could not be explained and also Dispari-

ties that could be explained in accordance with normal

applicable law (Anugerah Rizki Akbari, 2018).

(Sijing, 2006) explains that ”Knowledge manage-

ment is the process of acquiring and using knowl-

edge and techniques in an organization”. (Tjakraat-

madja and Lantu, 2006) explains that ”Knowledge

Management can be explained as systematic steps to

manage knowledge in organizations to create value

and increase competitive advantage”. (Davenport and

Prusak, 1998) state that generally a Knowledge Man-

agement project has one of the following three objec-

tives:

1. There is a basic knowledge and role of that knowl-

edge to the organization, mostly through a form of

knowledge mapping.

2. Develop a knowledge-based culture by encourag-

ing and supporting behaviour to share knowledge

(Knowledge Sharing) and be proactive in seeking

or providing new knowledge,

3. Building a knowledge infrastructure not only on a

technical system, but also a form of network that

connects humans with the availability of space,

time, tools, and a passion for interaction and col-

laboration.

According to (Muladi and Arief, 1984), explain-

ing that disparity in sentencing is a criminal applica-

tion that is not the same against the same crime (same

offence) or against a criminal offense whose nature

of danger can be compared (offences of comparable

seriousness) without basis clear justiﬁcation. Judges

decisions are an important aspect in the administra-

tion of the justice system. On one side of the judge’s

decision determines the defendant’s fate, namely by

providing legal certainty regarding the status of the

defendant whether the defendant was found guilty or

not along with legal remedies that can be submitted by

the defendant, either through an appeal, veriﬁcation,

or cassation.

Knowledge Management: Guidelines for Criminalization based on Analysis of Disparities in the Results of Corruption Criminal Decisions

279

2 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

This research uses a descriptive method by presenting

a summary of the results of observations and analysis

results from the Corruption Court Judgment Data of

the Republic of Indonesia and the Corruption Eradica-

tion Commission of the Republic of Indonesia in the

range of 2011-2015. A lawsuit in a corruption case

that is not in accordance with the Attorney General’s

Circular Letter Number. 003 of 2010. Data collec-

tion methods used in this study through several steps

carried out in several activities including:

1. Doing observations in order to obtain typologies

related to disparities in criminal acts of corruption

that occurred in the range of 2011-2015.

2. Doing processing data on the results of decisions

from the Supreme Court decision directory.

3. Doing statistical conclusions from the results pro-

cessed with Microsoft Excel.

4. And at the ﬁnal stage of making conclusions in a

statistical formative based on interviews that are

not directly to Survey Respondents.

5. Make conclusions about the research being car-

ried out and provide suggestions and submit them

for the future.

Figure 2: Research Methodology (Yudha, 2015)

The study was conducted through several struc-

tured stages with the aim of obtaining precise and ac-

curate data through the activity steps outlined below.

Stages of research is the development of the concept

of thinking that is used as a reference in ﬁnding solu-

tions to problems found. The process description of

the stages of the research carried out is as follows:

2.1 Formulation of the Problem

This step doing an analysis of the problem that oc-

curs, namely the existence of disparity in the prose-

cution and the results of the criminal conviction for

corruption that occurred in the period of 2011-2015

in the realm of the Attorney General of the Republic

of Indonesia. Disparity in prosecution is the differ-

ence between claims made by the Public Prosecutor

and the existing Prosecution Guidelines, in this case

SEJA Guideline Number: 003 of 2010. These differ-

ences are usually below the threshold that should be

for the minimum demands. The disparity of the re-

sults of convictions is the difference in the results of

criminal decisions from those prosecuted by the Pub-

lic Prosecutor and it usually occurs if the State is at

a loss but the criminal decision is different between

defendant 1 and the other defendants

2.2 Supporting Theory

This step is search for theoretical guidance that is af-

ter the research problem is formulated, the next step

is to look for theoretical guidance that can be used as

a theoretical basis for conducting research. The theo-

ries include theories in criminal law, theories in data

mining, software engineering theories and theories in

the development of knowledge management.

2.3 Collecting Data

This step is collecting decision directory data on

Supreme Court and MAPPI websites to formulate the

decision disparity problem that will be formulated. In

addition, observations, interviews and questionnaires

were also carried out. The interview technique was

carried out with a number of questions given to Sur-

vey Respondents consisting of KPK Prosecutors and

Staff regarding current conditions related to dispari-

ties. This questionnaire technique is given to the pop-

ulation that is sampled in the form of questions with

answers to two alternative choices. Observation tech-

nique by conducting discussions directly or indirectly

with prosecutors and KPK employees who are experts

in the ﬁeld of Justice and Law to see each decision

result until the other court proceedings until the deci-

sion becomes have legal force.

2.4 Data Analysis

This step to conduct data analysis that illustrates the

current conditions of prosecution disparity and deci-

sion disparity results using the classiﬁcation data min-

ing method in the form of a decision tree. Based on

the data that is processed and collected from the tech-

nique, it will produce a description of the typology of

the conditions that exist at this time related to the exis-

tence of the disparity in the decision and not making

CONRIST 2019 - International Conferences on Information System and Technology

280

demands in accordance with SEJA Guideline Num-

ber:003 of 2010.

2.5 Implementation Knowledge

Management System

This step is doing development of data to ﬁnd and

analysis gaps that occur then identify. Developing ap-

plications into Object Oriented Programming (OOP)

based programs in the form of Knowledge Manage-

ment Applications for Corruption Criminal Cases that

can serve as a supporting tool in making decisions

for Law Enforcement Ofﬁcials in corruption criminal

cases based on the disparity in the prosecution and

conviction for criminal cases of corruption.

3 RESULT AND ANALYSIS

3.1 Data Process

Based on the decision data in the Decision Directory

so far, it can be accessed together about Corruption

Crimes as many as 3,931 decisions. Where each is di-

vided into several criteria for corruption cases handled

by the Attorney General of the Republic of Indonesia,

and also the Corruption Eradication Commission with

the following details:

Figure 3: Corruption Category.

Based on Figure 3, we can be seen that for 1 cate-

gory of corruption the most is corruption which refers

to Law No.31 of 1999 in conjunction with Law No.20

of 2001. For the other 6 categories it is adjusted to

Criminal Article which is more speciﬁc and clearly

clause. For more clear, the following is an appearance

of the Supreme Court Verdict Directory website:

space

Figure 4: Verdict Directory of Supreme Court

(https://putusan.mahkamahagung.go.id/)

From the sample data obtained by MaPPI, then

the data is re-processed and built into a database of

corruption criminal application consisting of 31 ﬁelds

and 713 data records. The database was built using

MySQL Server which can later be used for applica-

tion development in the Corruption Criminal Knowl-

edge Management System. The application was made

to adjust with SEJA Number: 003 of 2010 to calculate

the interval of claims that should have been made by

the Public Prosecutor and also to be analysis. The fol-

lowing information is 31 ﬁelds that are used as a KM

database:

Knowledge Management: Guidelines for Criminalization based on Analysis of Disparities in the Results of Corruption Criminal Decisions

281

space

Figure 5: Database Field.

In addition to the emergence for issues of criminal

sentences that are higher than charges, the problem

that always arises every year in the trend of criminal

convictions is the amount of disparity in decisions.

Disparity in decisions is a serious problem because

it involves the value of justice to be achieved from a

conviction. With the emergence of criminal disparity,

it implies that there is injustice in the decisions of the

judges handed down to the defendant. Although dis-

parity is not possible to be eliminated, gaps that arise

from punishment can be reduced or minimized.

Processing results in this study found that there

were disparities in criminal prosecution that were still

under 18 months. For this category, a minimum of 3

month demands for corruption in Clause 3, following

3 typologies of disparity in the demands for Clause 3,

1. Disparity demand for 12 months,

2. Disparity demand for 14 and

3. Disparity demand for 15 months still occur in the

demand from prosecutor to the defendant. The

information can be show in Figure 4 until Figure

6 below :

Figure 6: Disparity demand for 12 month

For Figure 6 we can see, there is so many province

that has demands below 18 month. 18 month is

the minimum or the lowest demands based on At-

torney General’s Circular Number: 003 of 2010

Figure 7: Disparity demand for 14 month

For Figure 7 just 3 province which still has de-

mand below 18 month.

CONRIST 2019 - International Conferences on Information System and Technology

282

space

Figure 8: Disparity demand for 15 month

Then for Figure 8 there is so many the province

still has demand below 18 months and refer to

Attorney General’s Circular Letter Number. 003

of 2010 is not suitable. And for the detail about

suitable or not suitable on Clause 3 we can see

in attachment. Then after processing data for this

study, we can build Knowledge Management Ap-

plication for this case. Here’s the example dispar-

ity in the demands and the verdict of corruption

cases :

Figure 9: Example Disparity Punishment.

From Figure 9, there’s differences in demands

from prosecutor demand, but the Judge have their

discretion to punish 4 of them with 1 year pun-

ishment. As we can see, it can build image in the

society can be injustice because the case with cor-

ruption 19 billion rupiah and corruption 14 mil-

lion rupiah had the same verdict punishment.

3.2 Application Design

The Design of Knowledge Management Application

for Corruption Criminal Guidance is made based on

the collection of data and information carried out

to follow adjustments to the existing Attorney Gen-

eral Guideline Number: 003 of 2010 by incorporat-

ing 2 main components namely Country Losses and

Country Losses Returns. This application consists of

6 Forms namely Main Menu Form, Form Compute

Demand, KM Analysis Form, Compare Data Form,

Graphic Form and ﬁnally Data Input Form.

The following menu structure in the KM applica-

tion as follows:

space

Figure 10: Application Structure

Based on Figure 8, application menu structure

consists of 6 Main Forms that were built to help pro-

cess data on the verdict results of corruption decisions

that have a function as learning data from corruption

cases in the period 2011 to 2015 for Clause 2 and

Clause 3 only. With this Knowledge Management

Systems it hoped that it can be a tool before determin-

ing criminal charges for corruption cases. Following

is an explanation of each menu in the application:

1. Main Menu

For the main menu contains 4 menu choices

namely Program, Help, About and SEJA Informa-

tion. Programs for logging in and exiting appli-

cations, Help for help information, About infor-

mation about the makers of the KMS system and

Information SEJA as a Basic Guide for the devel-

opment of the KMS Criminal Corruption applica-

tion.

2. Calculate Demand

To count demands, it contains 6 buttons, namely

Compute Demand, Clear, Update Data, KM Anal-

ysis, Show Data and Exit Program. Compute De-

mands to calculate the interval of demands that

should be made based on Country Losses and

Country Losses Returns. Clear to do the recal-

culation, Data Update to do an automatic classiﬁ-

cation of the status of the suit whether it is in suit-

able with SEJA or not. KM Analysis to conduct

further analysis of the data, display data to display

data from the database. And ﬁnally the button to

exit the KMS Criminal Punishment application.

3. Analysis of KM

For KM analysis contains 6 buttons namely Tabu-

lation, Data Input, Graphics, Back, Compare Data

and Exit Program. Tabulation to display the ﬁl-

tered data based on Country Losses and Returns,

Input Data to process the new data input into the

database. Graphic to display data in a chart, Re-

turn to return to the Calculate Demands menu.

Compare Data to analysis 2 different data, and

Exit Program to end the use of the program.

Knowledge Management: Guidelines for Criminalization based on Analysis of Disparities in the Results of Corruption Criminal Decisions

283

4. Compare Data

Compare Data contains 2 buttons to Comment

and Return. Give comments to comment on the

comparison of 2 different data to be stored in the

database. Return to return to the KM Analysis

menu.

5. Graphics

For graphics containing 2 buttons namely Show

Data and Return, display data to view data in a

visualization chart and return to return to the KM

Application menu.

6. Data Input

For Data Input contains 3 buttons, namely Save,

Clear and Back. Save to save data to the database,

Clear to do new input from reload data and return

to return to the KM Analysis menu.

3.3 Graphic User Interface of

Application

The following are the results of the application of

the Knowledge Management Criminal System which

consists of 6 Forms as follows :

1. Main Menu Form

Figure 11: Main Menu Form

For Main Menu use as login Form to login to the

application, after login we can use according to

the needs.

2. Calculate Demand Form

Figure 12: Calculate Demand Form

For Calculate demand form, we can check for

Clause 2 or Clause 3 the best interval for pun-

ishment result for the Judge or Prosecutor can

take based on General Attorney Guideline Num-

ber: 003 of 2010.

3. Analysis of KM Form

Figure 13: Analysis of KM Form

For Analysis Form we can use compare 1 punish-

ment result with other result and make comment

if there is disparity in that result.

4. Compare Data Form

Figure 14: Compare Data Form

For Compare Data form we can check each detail

for the case of corruption held in the range of 2011

until 2015.

5. Graphics Form

Figure 15: Graphics Form

For Graphics Form we can see the difference be-

tween Clause 2 and Clause 3 for the case of cor-

ruption based on State Loses.

6. Data Input Form

Figure 16: Data Input Form

For Data Input Form, we can input new cases of

corruption to become one of our databases and

CONRIST 2019 - International Conferences on Information System and Technology

284

can be processed in the Knowledge Management

Application. So if there is new case we can input

to the application and can add into database.

4 CONCLUSIONS

The present work contributes to the corruption case

data of Clause 2 and Clause 3 and wellestablished

knowledge management models are able to handle the

new challenges to help Judge and Prosecutor to view

criminal case especially in corruption case. With this

application maybe will help Judge and Prosecutor to

ﬁnd the best demands to punish the corruption defen-

dant based on guidelines.

Future works might build upon the Supreme Court

and propose models that integrate with Punishment

Directory in every area of Justice of Indonesia At-

torney. And build an application based on website

or mobile application which can be accessed anytime

and anywhere for Judge or Prosecutor for their learn-

ing and working.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Thanks for all my friend in STMIK Nusa Mandiri

Jakarta who always support me and always take care

of me. Thanks for Corruption Eradication Commis-

sion for using this tools as supporting tool for prose-

cutor in there.

REFERENCES

Anugerah Rizki Akbari, Adery Ardhan Saputro, A. N. M.

(2018). Memaknai dan mengukur disparitas: Studi

terhadap praktik pemidanaan pada tindak pidana ko-

rupsi.

Davenport, T. H. and Prusak, L. (1998). Working knowl-

edge: Managing what your organization knows. Har-

vard Business School Press, Boston, MA, 210.

Kusuma, F. S. D. (2013). Analisa pengaruh knowl-

edge management terhadap keunggulan bersaing dan

kinerja perusahaan. Business accounting review,

1(2):161–171.

Muladi and Arief, B. N. (1984). Teori-teori dan kebijakan

pidana. Alumni.

Rukmini, M. (2006). Aspek hukum pidana dan kriminologi:

sebuah bunga rampai. Alumni.

Sijing, L. (2006). Analysis and design of knowledge man-

agement system. Asian Federation for Information

Technology in Agriculture, pages 172–178.

Tjakraatmadja, J. and Lantu, D. (2006). Knowledge man-

agement in learning organization context.

Yudha, B. (2015). Kajian penerapan knowledge manage-

ment system berbasis seci model dalam format e-

mobile: Studi kasus universitas indraprasta pgri. Fak-

tor Exacta, 8(3):279–289.

Knowledge Management: Guidelines for Criminalization based on Analysis of Disparities in the Results of Corruption Criminal Decisions

285