Disparities in Corruption Rulings within the Same Jurisdiction: Judicial Reasoning and the Construction of State Financial Loss in Village Videography Cases
Keywords:
Sentencing Disparities, Village Videography Corruption, State Financial Loss, Ratio Decidendi, Legal CertaintyAbstract
Sentencing disparities in corruption cases within the same jurisdiction raise concerns about legal certainty, particularly when similar factual circumstances produce different judicial outcomes. This study aims to analyze disparities in corruption rulings involving village videography services in Karo Regency by examining the application of offense elements, the construction of state financial loss, and the ratio decidendi. This normative legal study employs case and conceptual approaches through comparative analysis of four court rulings within the same jurisdiction. The findings show that the disparity is rooted not only in different verdicts but also in differences in judicial reasoning, particularly in connecting the unlawful act element, the actual performance of videography services, and state financial loss. The study contributes a comparative framework for understanding judicial consistency and demonstrates the importance of transparent and rational ratio decidendi in strengthening legal certainty in service-based corruption adjudication.
Abstrak
Disparitas putusan perkara korupsi dalam yurisdiksi yang sama menimbulkan persoalan kepastian hukum, terutama ketika kondisi faktual yang serupa menghasilkan putusan yang berbeda. Penelitian ini bertujuan menganalisis disparitas putusan dalam perkara korupsi jasa videografi desa di Kabupaten Karo dengan mengkaji penerapan unsur tindak pidana, konstruksi kerugian keuangan negara, dan ratio decidendi. Penelitian hukum normatif ini menggunakan pendekatan kasus dan konseptual melalui analisis komparatif terhadap empat putusan dalam yurisdiksi yang sama. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa disparitas tidak hanya terletak pada perbedaan putusan, tetapi juga pada perbedaan penalaran hakim, terutama dalam menghubungkan unsur perbuatan melawan hukum, pelaksanaan aktual jasa videografi, dan kerugian keuangan negara. Penelitian ini berkontribusi melalui kerangka komparatif untuk memahami konsistensi penalaran hakim serta menunjukkan pentingnya ratio decidendi yang transparan dan rasional dalam memperkuat kepastian hukum pada perkara korupsi berbasis jasa.
References
Alamudi, Arifin Al. “Amsal Sitepu Bebas, Begini Nasib 4 Videografer Lain Yang Ditangkap Kejari Karo.” IDN Times (Sumut), 2026. https://sumut.idntimes.com/news/sumatra-utara/amsal-sitepu-bebas-begini-nasib-4-videografer-lain-yang-ditangkap-kejari-karo-00-hz1ln-jdhrxf.
Ali, Zainuddin. Metode Penelitian Hukum. Sinar Grafika, 2021.
Anjani, Regina, and Edi Setiadi. “Disparitas Putusan Tindak Pidana Korupsi Yang Dilakukan Oleh Kepala Desa (Studi Putusan Nomor 06/Pid.Sus-Tpk/2022/PN.Bdg Dan Studi Putusan Nomor 06/Pid.Sus-Tpk/2021/PN.Plg).” Bandung Conference Series: Law Studies 3, no. 1 (2023). https://doi.org/10.29313/bcsls.v3i1.4917.
Apria, Lucia, and Darwis Robinson Manalu. “Toward a Secure Digital Society: The Influence of Digital Security Awareness on Students’ Personal Data Protection Behavior.” Societa: Journal of Society and Change 1, no. 1 (2026): 159–71. https://perfidiajournal.com/index.php/societa/article/view/37.
Aryani, Fajar Dian, Pujiyono, and Sidharta. “The Judicial Policy of Ratio Decidendi Regarding Corporate Criminal Liability towards Just Judgments.” Indonesia Law Review 14, no. 2 (2024): 23–38. https://doi.org/10.15742/ilrev.v14n2.2.
Butt, Simon. “Judicial Reasoning and Review in the Indonesian Supreme Court.” Asian Journal of Law and Society 6, no. 1 (2019): 67–97. https://doi.org/10.1017/als.2018.26.
Daulay, Ahmad Fadli. “Sentencing Disparities in Corruption Cases and Judicial Discretion in Indonesian Courts.” Jurnal Ilmu Hukum Kyadiren 6, no. 2 (2025): 160–72. https://doi.org/10.46924/jihk.v6i2.248.
Fadhlansyah, Holly. “Analisis Kritis Atas Implementasi Hukum Pidana Normatif Dalam Sistem Peradilan Indonesia.” Sumbang 12 Law Journal 2, no. 2 (2024): 44–55. https://jurnal.umsb.ac.id/index.php/smb12lj/article/view/5767/3904.
Farig, Muamar Azmar Mahmud. “Intervensi Publik Dalam Penjatuhan Putusan Dan Upaya Mengatasinya Melalui Pendekatan Hyperrealism.” MariNews: Mahkamah Agung Republik Indonesia, 2025. https://marinews.mahkamahagung.go.id/artikel/intervensi-publik-dalam-penjatuhan-putusan-0ih.
Flora, Henny Saida, and Taqyuddin Kadir. “Viral Justice: The Influence of Social Media Culture on the Independence of Law Enforcement.” Ipso Jure 2, no. 12 (2026): 41–51. https://doi.org/10.62872/fk6r6q02.
Harsono, Iwan, Himawan Sutanto, Siti Zuhroh, Ivon Arisanti, and Yossy Dwi Erliana. “The Influence of Socio-Economic Factors on Marriage Patterns in Indonesia: A Quantitative Analysis of the Relationship between Social Status and Marriage Decisions.” Sciences Du Nord Humanities and Social Sciences 1, no. 01 (February 7, 2024): 33–39. https://doi.org/10.58812/snhss.v1i1.5.
Hasibuan, Himliah. “Kepastian Hukum Dalam Putusan Hakim: Studi Terhadap Inkonsistensi Yurisprudensi Mahkamah Agung.” Yudhistira: Jurnal Yurisprudensi, Hukum Dan Peradilan 2, no. 3 (2024): 76–84. https://doi.org/10.59966/yudhistira.v2i3.1670.
López Castillo, Alan Christian, Edward Usaqui Barbaran, Miguel Oscar López Orellana, Aníbal Campos Barreto, Llesica Soria Ramirez, Wilmer Ortega Chávez, Víctor Tedy López Panaifo, and Alex Davis Astohuaman Huaranga. “Media Pressure and Pretrial Detention Requirements in Ucayali, Peru: A Study Based on Neutrosophic Measures.” Neutrosophic Sets and Systems 74 (2024): 538–48. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.14421765.
Lubis, Andi Hakim, Junaidi Lubis, and Said Rizal. “Optimalisasi Pengawasan Dan Pembinaan Hakim Menuju Kekuasaan Kehakiman Yang Berintegritas Dan Bermartabat.” Ilmu Hukum Prima (IHP) 5, no. 1 (2022): 12–24. https://doi.org/10.34012/jihp.v5i1.2456.
Munthe, Raja Didit Pratama, Ahmad Ansyari Siregar, and Nimrot Siahaan. “Legal Analysis of the Supreme Court Decision Regarding the Annulment of Acquittal in Corruption Crime Case: A Study of Decision Number 1227 K/Pid.Sus/2022.” Sign: Jurnal Hukum 7, no. 2 (2026): 1375–88. https://doi.org/10.37276/sjh.v7i2.651.
Negara, Dharma Setiawan, and Erwin Susilo. “Independensi Kekuasaan Kehakiman Dalam Menjatuhkan Putusan Ditinjau Dari Perspektif Undang-Undang Sebagai Perjanjian.” Mimbar Hukum 37, no. 1 (2025): 83–106. https://doi.org/10.22146/mh.v37i1.18891.
Pengadilan Negeri Medan. “Putusan Nomor 27/Pid.Sus-Tpk/2025/PN Mdn,” 2026.
———. “Putusan Nomor 32/Pid.Sus-Tpk/2025/PN Mdn,” 2026.
Prawiranegara, Bima Satya. “Implikasi Tekanan Masyarakat Terhadap Kebebasan Hakim Dalam Memutus Perkara: Studi Kasus Putusan Hakim Atas Richard Eliezer.” Progressive Law and Society 2, no. 1 (2024). https://doi.org/10.14710/pls.31244.
Sidiqah, Meliyani. “Independence of Judges and Public Opinion.” Sociological Jurisprudence Journal 6, no. 2 (2023): 133–43. https://doi.org/10.22225/scj.6.2.2023.133-143.
Suparno, Erdhy Widyatama, Alwan Hadianto, and Isfandir Hutasoit. “Disparitas Pemidanaan Korupsi Dalam Perspektif Kepastian Hukum Dan Keadilan Publik.” Jurnal USM Law Review 9, no. 1 (2026): 341–60. https://doi.org/10.26623/julr.v9i1.13356.
Undang-undang (UU) Nomor 20 Tahun 2001 tentang Perubahan Atas Undang-Undang Nomor 31 Tahun 1999 tentang Pemberantasan Tindak Pidana Korupsi.
Undang-undang (UU) Nomor 31 Tahun 1999 tentang Pemberantasan Tindak Pidana Korupsi.
Yatnih, Endah Fuzi. “Pengaruh Media Sosial Terhadap Persepsi Dan Penegakan Hukum Pidana: Dampak Media Sosial Terhadap Opini Publik, Proses Hukum Dan Keadilan Pidana.” Equality Before the Law 4, no. 2 (2024). https://doi.org/10.36232/equalitybeforethelaw.v4i2.451.
Zuhrah. “Urgensi Independensi Hakim Dalam Berbagai Disparitas Putusan Perkara Korupsi.” Sangaji: Jurnal Pemikiran Syariah Dan Hukum 7, no. 1 (2023): 53–73. https://doi.org/10.52266/sangaji.v6i2.1259.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Radit Fabian, Zuleka Rohmah Yantika (Author)
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
You are free to:
- Share — copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format for any purpose, even commercial purposes.
- Adaptation — mixing, changing, and developing materials for any purpose, even commercial ones.
Under the following terms:
- Attribution — You must give appropriate credit , provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made . You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use.
- ShareAlike — If you remix, transform, or build upon the material, you must distribute your contributions under the same license as the original.
- No additional restrictions — You may not apply legal terms or technological measures that legally restrict others from doing anything the license permits.
