Criminal Acts Against The Law Of Corruption (Case Study Medan District Court No. 45 / Pid.Sus-TPK/2021 / Fr.Mdn jo Medan High Court case No. 33/Pid.Sus-TPK/2021 / PT.Mdn)

ABSTRACT

In essence, the land has a very important meaning for human life, because the land is the main foundation of all activities carried out. In accordance with the ownership and use of land in Indonesia, there are lands that are controlled by state-owned institutions, one of which is land controlled by PT.Kereta Api Indonesia (Persero). State-controlled land PT.Kereta Api Indonesia (Persero) which was originally to support the potential development process of PT.Kereta Api Indonesia (Persero) itself, now there are many houses and community business activities throughout Indonesia, one of which is in the city of Medan, North Sumatra province, there are many areas on the edge of the railway where on each edge there are houses and business activities of residents who are renting from the land assets of PT.Kereta Api Indonesia (Persero). The problem raised in this thesis is the lease of land assets of PT.KAI (persero) Division I North Sumatra which led to the conviction in the verdict of committing acts against the law of corruption, because they do not want to fulfill their obligations to pay rent, while the requirements of Article 2 and Article 3 of the UUPTPK are acts against the law (Wederrechtelijkheid) or abuse of control that begins with a violation of procedure or, contrary to the rules or deviations from the authority provided for in the law on procurement of government goods and services, the procedure starts from planning, the need until the completion of all activities to obtain government goods/services with the aim of enriching themselves or benefiting themselves, causing financial losses to the state. While the unlawful acts committed by the defendant include the scope of civil (Onrecht Matiq Overheidsdaad) which is private (vide Article 1365 of the Civil Code) and can file a tort claim in the form of reimbursement of costs, losses, and interest as in Article 1243 of the Civil Code and Article 1267 of the Civil Code.

INTRODUCTION
Land has a very important meaning for human life, because land is the main foundation of all activities carried out, whether individuals, groups of people, a legal entity or the government must use the land. In addition, the land also serves as a source of wealth because the land and its contents can provide various sources of income for the owner and those who control. Much of human life depends on the soil. The human need for land is a very basic and absolute need. In fact, history shows that human survival, both as individuals and as social beings, always requires land to meet their needs by means of relationships, and utilizing land resources. Land for human life can be considered as a permanent treasure, because it provides stability to be reserved for human life in the future (Oky Nasrul, 2022).
For human life the soil has a very important meaning, because most of the human life depends on the soil. Land can be assessed as property that has the nature of "permanent " and is a place of settlement that can be reserved for life in the future. Apart from being a source of livelihood for humans, land also serves as a place to live and earn a living through farming, plantations, offices, industry (Imam Sutiknjo,1999).
In ancient times, people can own and master the land in an easy way that is to master it by cutting down trees on the land and then directly building a house or the like or can directly work on it which then the land becomes a personal asset that is inherited from generation to generation.
But now it is no longer valid, the development of Science and technology has given the consequence that the relationship between humans and the land easily required the arrangement and arrangement of more carefully, especially with regard to the control, designation, use, supply and maintenance (Ramli Zein,1995) Basic agrarian law (UUPA) as a reference from Law No. 5 of 1960 was prepared based on the guidelines of Pancasila as the basis of kerokanian and is the principle of agrarian law that is specific and has been embodied in the Articles of the basic agrarian law.
In the National Land Law, two groups of land are now known, namely land that has not been or is no longer controlled by one of the land rights and land rights controlled by individuals and legal entities with land rights referred to in Article 16 Paragraph (1) of the UUPA, namely : property rights, Business rights (HGU), building rights (HGB), use rights, lease rights, land clearing rights, Forest Product Collection rights and other rights that are not included in the rights that authorize the right holder to use the land in question (Nurhayati,2007).
In accordance with the ownership and use of land in Indonesia, there are lands that are controlled by state-owned institutions, one of which is land controlled by PT.Kereta Api Indonesia (Persero). On the way PT.Kereta Api Indonesia (Persero) in Indonesia, the initial purpose of state land tenure will certainly be used for a potential development as well as to improve the role of the railway which is directly related to matters concerning facilities and supporting infrastructure for PT.Kereta Api Indonesia (Persero). However, at present, there are several supporting facilities and infrastructure that are no longer used and as the development over time, state land controlled by PT.Kereta Api Indonesia (Persero) which was originally to support the potential development process of PT.Kereta Api Indonesia (Persero) itself, there are now many houses and business activities throughout the territory of Indonesia, one of which is in the city of Medan, North Sumatra province, there are many railway edge areas, where every edge of the railway there are houses of citizens who are people who rent from the land assets of PT.Kereta Api Indonesia (Persero).
PT.Kereta Api Indonesia (Persero) is a stateowned company that has management rights. PT.Kereta Api Indonesia (Persero) in its implementation of the management rights it controls to use the land properly and PT.Kereta Api Indonesia (Persero) leases the land to third parties, both to legal entities, namely companies and individuals.
PT.Kereta Api Indonesia (Persero) according to the attachment of the letter of the head of the National Land Agency No.500-1255 of May 4, 1992 included in the definition of government agencies that control and manage state lands, caused by PT.Kereta Api Indonesia (Persero) is a state-owned enterprise (BUMN) allowed to lease which is allowed to carry out asset land lease business according to the agreement which has been stipulated in the regulation of the Minister of State-Owned Enterprises No.PER-04/MBU/08/2017 concerning the regulation of SOE agreements in the framework of the use of fixed assets of the company for a period of up to 5 (five) years, of course, the regulation is prepared in such a way with reference to the regulation of the Minister of state-owned enterprises (SOEs) No.PER-13/MBU/08 / 2017.
PT.Kereta Api Indonesia (Persero) in optimizing through asset utilization system as stipulated in the regulation of the minister of SOEs No.PER-13/MBU/09 / 2014 on guidelines for the utilization of fixed assets, which in the regulation has been explained in detail about the rights and obligations that must be fulfilled by partners who lease Soe land. About leasing assets of PT.Kereta Api Indonesia (Persero) in its operations is divided into 2 (two) namely Railway and Non Railway. Asset lease PT.Kereta Api Indonesia (Persero) the Railway is a lease that is still within the scope of the railway is still active. Lease for Non Railway is a lease within the scope of this non-active railway, especially for land inviting many people to occupy land owned by PT.Kereta Api Indonesia (Persero) especially from PT.Kereta Api Indonesia (Persero) utilizes the inactive land to be leased to the community and if they still want to occupy the land managed by PT.Kereta Api Indonesia (Persero), then the tenant is obliged to renew the contract again and so on as per the fixed asset lease regulations of PT.KAI The practice of land use assets owned by PT.Kereta Api Indonesia (Persero) which is leased to the public often causes legal problems due to noncompliance with the lease agreement held. Basically, an agreement will take place well if the parties to the agreement are based on good faith, but if one party is not in good faith or does not carry out its obligations, legal problems will arise. That here the author will conduct an analysis of legal considerations on legal products or decisions of the panel of judges, or the indictment of the course of proceedings in court and the behavior of prosecutors and judges during the trial process, to determine the extent to which legal considerations or legal process in accordance or contrary to legal principles, with procedural legal procedures and also with legal justice, moral justice and social justice as well as the code of ethics of law enforcement behavior . Because the defendant TAUFIK SITEPU, S.H was convicted of committing an act against the law of corruption Article 2 Paragraph (1) of the Corruption Act is not an act against civil law (onrechtmatigedaad), considering that there are still many people who use the land assets of PT.Kereta Api Indonesia (Persero) whose lease term has expired but still occupies land assets owned by PT.Kereta Api Indonesia (Persero) without extending the lease back, will be subject to the same sanctions, Article 7 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights states that "all persons are equal before the law and are entitled to equal legal protection without discrimination of any kind

METHOD
The type of research used is normative legal research, which focuses on examining the verdict of corruption at the Medan District Court No.45/Pid.Sus-TPK/2021 / Fr.Mdn jo Medan High Court Decision No.33/Pid.sus-TPK/2021 / PT.Mdn, because in the verdict the defendant was found guilty of committing unlawful acts Article 2 Paragraph (1) of the Corruption Act and also to know the considerations and reasons for the judge in deciding the case, considering that the object of the case does not carry out the obligation to extend the lease and pay the rent as per the fixed asset lease regulations of PT.KAI (Persero) Division I North Sumatra which is regulated in the decree of the Board of Directors of PT.KAI workshop business. Normative legal research is a scientific research procedure to find the truth based on the logic of legal Science and the normative side, this type of research does not know Field Research because what is studied is legal materials so it can be said as; library based, facusing on reading and analysis of the primary and secondary materials (library based, with a focus on reading and analysis of primary and Secondary Materials).

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
In the decision of the District Court case No.45/Pid.Sus-TPK/2021 / Fr.Mdn jo Medan High Court No.33/Pid.Sus-TPK/2021 / PT.P.S. The accused, s.H was sentenced to imprisonment for acts against the law of corruption Article 2 Paragraph (1) of the Corruption Act in addition to being sentenced to imprisonment, the defendant TAUFIK SITEPU,S.H is also sentenced to a fine with a subsidiary of imprisonment if the fine is not paid.
Before discussing the considerations and reasons for the judge to give a criminal verdict against the corruption law Article 2 Paragraph (1) of the corruption law, the author outlines the position of the case as follows : That  Primair: That the defendant TAUFIK SITEPU, SH since July 2007 to September 2020 or at least at some time in 2007 to 2020 housed at PT.Kereta Api Indonesia (Persero) Division I North Sumatra is located at Km 0+696-0+717 Cross Medan-Belawan precisely on Jalan Perintis Kemerdekaan / Jalan Putri Merak Jingga dh.Jalan Gudang Medan or at least in another place based on the provisions of Article 5 in conjunction with Article 35 paragraph (1) and (2)   (1) every state Ministry/institution/work unit of the regional apparatus that has a source of income shall intensify the acquisition of income to the authority and responsibility b. Paragraph (2) in the government regulation receipts must be paid in full to the State/Regional Treasury in due time which is further regulated in the government regulation 2. Impose a crime against the defendant TAUFIK SITEPU, SH in the form of imprisonment for 11 (eleven) years deductible as long as the defendant is in temporary custody by order of the defendant remains detained in temporary detention by order of the defendant remains detained and a fine of Rp.500,000,000 (five hundred million rupiah) Subsidiair 6 (six) months confinement, 3.  Rp.11,255,502,000 (eleven billion two hundred and fifty-five million five hundred and two thousand rupiah) so that there is a shortage of replacement money payment of Rp.982,517,417 (nine hundred eighty-two million five hundred seventeen thousand four hundred seventeen rupiah) no later than within 1 (one) month after the verdict has obtained permanent force, the property is seized by the prosecutor and auctioned to cover the replacement money and in the event that the defendant does not have sufficient property to pay the replacement money, the defendant will have to pay replaced by imprisonment of 5 (five) years 6 (six) months of confinement.
4. Stating evidence in the form of :  Binjai Cross-Rail Road) Kesawan Village, West Medan District, Medan City, North Sumatra province.
Refunded for payment of replacement money. 5. Determine that the defendant is burdened to pay the cost of the case of Rp.10,000 (ten thousand rupiah).
In deciding a case there are considerations that are owned by the judge as a basis in judging the defendant. Consideration of judges in decision number 45 / Pid.Sus-TPK/2021 / Fr.Mdn as follows: considering, that the defendant was brought to trial by the public prosecutor was indicted based on the indictment of Primair and Subsidair.
Considering, that against the indictment of the Public Prosecutor the defendant/the defendant's Legal Advisor has filed an objection as the exception of the defendant's Legal Advisor dated August 5, 2021 as well as the Public Prosecutor has filed a Replic/response dated August 12, 2021 and against the exception of the defendant's Legal Advisor and has been decided by Interim Decision number 45/Pid.sus.TPK / 2021 / / PN Mdn dated August 23, 2021.
Considering that in order to prove the indictment of the public prosecutor in front of the trial has submitted witnesses who have testified under oath/promise. Considering, that the Public Prosecutor has filed an expert who has been questioned.
Considering that the defendant's Legal Counsel has filed a witness Ade Charge (mitigating witness) and an expert who has given evidence. Considering, that the next trial the Public Prosecutor has confronted the defendant TAUFIK SITEPU, SH and has given a statement.
Considering, that according to elucidation of Article 2 Paragraph (1) of Law No.31 of 1999 concerning the limitation of corruption as amended and supplemented by Law No. 20 of 2001 concerning amendments to law no.31 of 1999 concerning the eradication of corruption, that what is meant by "against the law" is to include acts against the law in the formal sense as well as in the material sense, that is, even though the act is not regulated in the legislation, however, if the act is considered reprehensible because it is not in accordance with the sense of justice or the norms of social life in society, the act can be punished; Considering, that according to the decision of the throughout the phrase that reads, What is meant by "unlawfully" in this article includes unlawful acts in the formal sense as well as in the material sense, that is, even if the act is not regulated in the legislation, but if the act is considered reprehensible because it is not in accordance with the sense of justice or the norms of social life in society, the act can be punished", it does not have binding legal force; Considering that with the decision of the Constitutional Court (wederrectelijkheid) in a formal sense, Prof. Van Hattum argues that, an act is only seen as against the law (wederrectelijkheid) if the Act meets all the elements contained in the formulation of a crime according to the law of Prof.DR.Andi Hamzah argues that, against the law in the formal sense means doing an act that is contrary to the obligations stipulated by law; Considering, that with respect to the doctrine of the jurists, the unlawful act is if the perbauatan committed by the defendant has fulfilled the elements mentioned in the formulation of the criminal act in the legislation as has been charged by the public prosecutor in his indictment and contrary to the obligations stipulated by the legislation, without having to be searched again whether the; Considering, that to meet the element against the law does not need the entire indictment proved, enough of a single act of the act charged to the defendant in the indictment of the public prosecutor proved against the law then it is enough declared to meet the element against the law in the indictment primair; Considering, that whether the actions charged against the defendant meet the "against the law " element of the primair indictment, the panel of judges will consider based on the facts revealed at the trial, as follows: 18. That the lands controlled by the state railway company during the Dutch colonial period called Staat Spoorwage (SS) is not given proof of land rights but only the surrender of land ownership (Bestemming) based on the ordinance contained in the Staatblad Nedeland Inde; 19. That Goundkaart is not a proof of ownership of land rights as land rights mentioned in Article 16 of the Constitution, but based on Article 24 paragraph (1) PP No.24 of 1997 on land registration that for the purposes of registration of land rights from the conversion of Old rights is evidenced by evidence of the existence of such rights in the form of written evidence, witness statements and / or statements concerned that the degree of truth by the adjudication committee in the systematic land registration or by the head of the Land Office in the sporadic land registration is considered sufficient to register the rights, rights holders and the rights of other parties who burden it; Considering, that based on the announcement of the decree of the Minister of Transportation and Public Works Of The Republic of Indonesia No.2 year 1960 dated January 1,1950 that Djawatan Kereta Api Republik Indonesia (DKARI), Staats Spoorwagen (SS) and varenigde spoorwegbedrift (VS) merged into Djawatan Kereta Api Indonesia (DKAI) and its assets since January 1, 1950 taken by DKA so that de facto assets have been controlled. Furthermore, with the issuance of PP No.40 of 1959 and PP No.41 of 1959 then de jurei assets-assets above controlled; Considering that the Grondkaart recorded in the recapitulation list of fixed assets-9 Perumka Land shows the basis of ownership of the land as owned by PT.Kereta Api Indonesia (Persero), but this Groundkaart needs to be done to stabilize the status of a certificate of land rights in accordance with its use; Considering, that land that has a basis in the form of Grondkaart cannot be owned by individuals before there is a letter of proof of asset write-off according to the SOE state regulation no. Api Indonesia DIVRE I north Sumatra at Jalan Perintis Independence / Jalan Putri Merak Jingga DH Jalan Gudang Medan by opening a workshop business, if indeed since 1998 the defendant's parents have had proof of ownership of the land of course the defendant's parents did not make a lease agreement with PT.Kereta Api Indonesia Divre I North Sumatra on the land in question, then the object of the land the defendant claimed ownership of the land tenure based on the appropriate Camat decree listed in the signpost, but after being confirmed to the West Medan District and the West Medan District stated : "The Kelurahan and Kecamatan parties until now have never issued any letter, especially on behalf of M.ARIFIN SITEPU, et al. " and after the meeting at the District Office of the narrative "based on the decree of the Sub-District Head" is dikikoks; Weighing, that from 2007 to 2020 the defendant did not extend and did not pay rent on land owned by PT.Kereta Api Indonesia Divre I North Sumatra at Jalan Perintis Kemerdekaan / Jalan Putri Merak Jingga DH Jalan Gudang Medan Jalan Perintis Kemerdekaan / Jalan Putri Merak Jingga Dh Jalan Gudang Medandan commercialized by opening a car service workshop business so that the defendant benefited from the workshop business and the defendant did not pay the land rent to PT.Kereta Api Indonesia division so that PT.Kereta Api Indonesia Divre I North Sumatra suffered losses because the lease is a fixed income for cash PT.Kereta Api Indonesia Division I North Sumatra; Noting, Article 2 Paragraph (1)

CONCLUSION
The unlawful element of the provisions on corruption Article 2 Paragraph (1) of the Corruption Act is a means to enrich oneself or another person or corporation. Thus, as a legal consequence of the formulation of the provisions on corruption, even though an act has been: "harming the state finances and the state economy", but if it is done not against the law, then the act of "enriching oneself or another person or a corporation" is not a crime of corruption as referred to in Article 2 Paragraph (1) of the corruption law.