Regulation of Embezzlement in Indonesian Criminal Law

Oct 13, 2025 by recoveryshake.com 30 views

Introduction

In the world of law enforcement, the role of judges is very crucial in preventing and eradicating all forms of deviant behavior, including cases of embezzlement of cars. In each trial, the judge is required to prove the defendant's mistakes based on two legal evidence. This proof process requires confidence from the judge of the actions taken by the defendant, taking into account juridical and non-juridical aspects. Through this article, we will analyze and explain how embezzlement is regulated in Indonesian Criminal Law, as well as the relationship between evidence of criminal acts with the form of judges' decisions, with a focus on the decision of PN No. 72/PID.B/2019/PN TAB and MA Decision No. 91 K/PID/2020.

Regulation of Embezzlement in Indonesian Criminal Law

The embezzlement is regulated in the Criminal Code (KUHP) in Articles 372 to 377, which explains the criminal offenses committed by controlling other people's property with the intention to benefit themselves or other parties. In 2023, through Law Number 1, this regulation was also renewed in Articles 486 to 491, providing a broader context of this crime. Embezzlement is a crime that requires a strong proof. In the proof process, the judge must examine whether the elements regulated in the article have been fulfilled. The main element in the crime of embezzlement is evil intentions (mens rea) and concrete actions (actus reus) which harm the owner of the goods.

Judge's Proof and Decision Relationship

Proof is the core of a criminal case. In the context of criminal procedural law in Indonesia, the judge acts as an objective assessment of the facts revealed at the trial. In PN Decision No. 72/PID.B/2019/PN Tab, the judge stated that the defendant was proven to have embezzled according to Article 372 of the Criminal Code, but the judge's decision to free the defendant from all lawsuits was considered wrong. One of the reasons for the mistake is the conclusion that between the defendant and the victim there is only a car sale and purchase relationship without any clear links to the money given by the witness to the victim. Basically, the defendant borrowed a car from the victim and then sold it without the victim's knowledge, which clearly met the embezzlement element.

Analysis of Decisions and Its Impacts

Analysis of PN Decision No. 72/PID.B/2019/PN TAB and MA Decision No. 91 K/PID/2020 shows the inconsistency in law enforcement. The first decision to free the defendant from the demands did not provide a sense of justice for victims who were clearly disadvantaged. In the second decision, the Supreme Court had the opportunity to correct the error of the First Level Court's decision. The Supreme Court's decision shows the importance of in-depth evaluation of existing evidence and considering victims' rights in each decision.

Challenges Faced by the Indonesian Justice System

Overall, the case of embezzlement of this car shows the challenges faced by the Indonesian justice system in implementing the law fairly. A good understanding of the juridical and non-juridical aspects in proof is the key to achieving justice decisions and reducing the possibility of mistakes in the decision. By considering all these factors, we can learn that the decision taken by the judge not only affects the defendant but also involves the rights and interests of victims. In an effort towards justice, it is important for judges to hold on to the legal principle and ensure that all elements of crime are examined carefully.

Conclusion

In conclusion, the analysis of PN Decision No. 72/PID.B/2019/PN TAB and MA Decision No. 91 K/PID/2020 shows the importance of a thorough understanding of the juridical and non-juridical aspects in proof. The decision taken by the judge not only affects the defendant but also involves the rights and interests of victims. Therefore, it is essential for judges to hold on to the legal principle and ensure that all elements of crime are examined carefully. This will help to achieve justice decisions and reduce the possibility of mistakes in the decision.

Recommendations

Based on the analysis of PN Decision No. 72/PID.B/2019/PN TAB and MA Decision No. 91 K/PID/2020, the following recommendations are made:

Judges should have a thorough understanding of the juridical and non-juridical aspects in proof.
Judges should consider the rights and interests of victims in each decision.
Judges should hold on to the legal principle and ensure that all elements of crime are examined carefully.
The Indonesian justice system should implement a more consistent and fair law enforcement system.

By following these recommendations, the Indonesian justice system can improve its performance and achieve justice decisions that are fair and consistent.

Q: What is embezzlement in Indonesian Criminal Law?

A: Embezzlement is a crime regulated in the Criminal Code (KUHP) in Articles 372 to 377, which explains the criminal offenses committed by controlling other people's property with the intention to benefit themselves or other parties.

Q: What are the main elements of the crime of embezzlement?

A: The main element in the crime of embezzlement is evil intentions (mens rea) and concrete actions (actus reus) which harm the owner of the goods.

Q: What is the role of judges in preventing and eradicating all forms of deviant behavior?

A: The role of judges is very crucial in preventing and eradicating all forms of deviant behavior, including cases of embezzlement of cars. In each trial, the judge is required to prove the defendant's mistakes based on two legal evidence.

Q: What is the relationship between evidence of criminal acts with the form of judges' decisions?

A: Proof is the core of a criminal case. In the context of criminal procedural law in Indonesia, the judge acts as an objective assessment of the facts revealed at the trial.

Q: What is the importance of in-depth evaluation of existing evidence in judges' decisions?

A: The Supreme Court's decision shows the importance of in-depth evaluation of existing evidence and considering victims' rights in each decision.

Q: What are the challenges faced by the Indonesian justice system in implementing the law fairly?

A: The case of embezzlement of this car shows the challenges faced by the Indonesian justice system in implementing the law fairly. A good understanding of the juridical and non-juridical aspects in proof is the key to achieving justice decisions and reducing the possibility of mistakes in the decision.

Q: What is the importance of considering the rights and interests of victims in judges' decisions?

A: By considering all these factors, we can learn that the decision taken by the judge not only affects the defendant but also involves the rights and interests of victims.

Q: What are the recommendations for improving the performance of the Indonesian justice system?

A: The following recommendations are made:

Judges should have a thorough understanding of the juridical and non-juridical aspects in proof.
Judges should consider the rights and interests of victims in each decision.
Judges should hold on to the legal principle and ensure that all elements of crime are examined carefully.
The Indonesian justice system should implement a more consistent and fair law enforcement system.

By following these recommendations, the Indonesian justice system can improve its performance and achieve justice decisions that are fair and consistent.