Nurmayani, Nurmayani and Madinar, Madinar and karmila, Febbiazka AUTHORITY OF SUPERVISORY APPARATUSINTERNAL GOVERNMENT OR APIP IN DETERMINING STATE LOSSES DUE TO CORRUPTION IN LOCAL GOVERNMENT INSTITUTIONS. Tandulako Law Review, 5. pp. 143-151. ISSN ISSN: 2527-2977| e-ISSN: 2527-2985

Preview

Text 15281-51525-1-PB.pdf Download (173kB) | Preview

Abstract

AbstractThis time,there is often debate betweentwo 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 theIndonesiaConstitution1945 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 re-search is normative legal research, normatively is the approach by collecting and studying, documents, and applicable laws and regulations, which are related to the de-termination of state losses by APIP.The results of the research shows that based on Ar-ticle 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 isinformative 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:Authority;APIP; StateLosses;Local GovernmentVolume 5 Issue 2, December2020: pp. 143-151. Copyright ©2020 TALREV.Faculty of Law Tadulako University, Palu, Central Sulawesi, Indonesia.ISSN: 2527-2977| e-ISSN: 2527-2985.Open acces at: http://jurnal.untad.ac.id/index.php/TLR

Item Type:	Article
Subjects:	K Law > K Law (General)
Divisions:	Fakultas Hukum (FH) > Prodi Ilmu Hukum
Depositing User:	NURMAYANI
Date Deposited:	20 May 2021 07:34
Last Modified:	20 May 2021 07:34
URI:	http://repository.lppm.unila.ac.id/id/eprint/30271

Actions (login required)

View Item