KEDUDUKAN BPKP DALAM MENGAUDIT KERUGIAN KEUANGAN NEGARA PASCA PUTUSAN MAHKAMAH KONSTITUSI NOMOR: 31/PUU-X/2012

Erry Gusman

Sari


State financial losses are those caused by unlawful acts or acts that abuse the authority, opportunity or means available to someone due to their position or position and this is done in conjunction with acts of enriching oneself or another person or a corporation. Conflict of authority related to the assessment of state financial losses in handling corruption cases, answered by the issuance of the Constitutional Court Decision Number 31 / PUU-X / 2012 dated October 23, 2012. Polemics related to the authority to calculate state losses in handling corruption cases are answered with the issuance of Decision of the Constitutional Court (MK) Number 31 / PUU-X / 2012 dated October 23, 2012. For this reason the authors are interested in examining how the role of BPKP in auditing state finances after the MK decision. This study uses normative juridical writing methods. After the writer conducted the research, the writer concluded that: 1) BPKP's position after the Constitutional Court's decision, acknowledged the authority of BPKP in conducting an investigative audit; 2) The impact of BPKP's audit results as a basis for calculating the losses of state finances can be seen from the BPKP's repressive strategy. The repressive strategy carried out by BPKP had an impact in terms of conducting investigative audits carried out on the handling of cases that were strategic, significant, material and received public scrutiny. In repressive efforts, the role of BPKP is not limited to conducting audits; 3) To optimize BPKP audit results as a basis for calculating state financial losses in preventing money laundering, BPKP in accordance with Government Regulation No. 60/2008 concerning Government Internal Control Systems and Presidential Regulation No. 192/2014 can conduct internal supervision through audits including audits investigative.

Teks Lengkap:

Hal 348-357

Referensi


A Dictionary for Accountants, Fifth Edition 1978, Prentice Hall of India, New Delhi, dalam artikel Eddy Mulyadi Soepardi, Memahami Kerugian Keuangan Negara sebagai Salah Satu Unsur Tindak Pidana Korupsi.

Ahmad Fikri Hadin, 2013, Eksistensi Badan Pengawasan Keuangan dan Pembangunan di Era Otonomi Daerah, Genta Press, Yogyakarta.

Andi Hamzah, 2007, Pemberantasan Korupsi: Melaui Hukum Pidana Nasional Dan Internasional, PT. Rajagrafondo Persada, Jakarta.

Arens and Loebbecke, 2000, Auditing: An Integrated Approach, eight edition.

Arifin P. Soeria Atmadja, 2005, Keuangan Publik dalam Persfektif Hukum Teori, Praktik dan Kritik, Jakarta, Fakultas Hukum Universitas Indonesia.

Bachrul Amiq, 2010, Aspek Hukum Pengawsan Pengelolaan Keuangan Daerah dalam Perspektif Penyelenggaraan Negara yang Bersih, LaksBang Pressindo, Yogyakarta.

BPKP, 2009, Pedoman Penugasan Bidang Investigasi, Jakarta, Deputi Bidang Investigasi.

J. Sitorus, 2011, Kewenangan BPKP dan Kejaksaan Dalam Penuntutan, Medan, Faklutas Hukum Universitas Sumatera Utara.

Leo Herbert, 1979. Guide to Solving The Cases in Auditing The Performance of Management. Michigan, Lifetime Learning Publications.

Lukman Hakim, 2010, Kedudukan Hukum Komisi Negara Di Indonesia, Program Pasca Sarjana Universitas Brawijaya, Malang.

Muhamad Djafar Saidi, 2011, Hukum Keuangan Negara, Rajawali Pers, Jakarta.

Moh. Mahfud MD dan SF. Marbun, 1987, Pokok-Pokok Hukum Administrasi Negara, Yogyakarta, Liberty.

M. Riadhussyah, Peranan BPKP Menghitung Kerugian Keuangan Negara Dalam Rangka Penanganan Perkara Tindak Pidana Korupsi, Universitas Mataram, Mataram,.

Piatur Pangaribuan dan Arie Purnomosidi, 2012, Negara Hukum dalam Kerangka NKRI, Yuma Pressindo, Purwakarta.

Piatur Pangaribuan, 2011, Kewenangan Audit Investigatif Mengidenti kasi, Menentukan dan Menghitung Kerugian Keuangan Negara atas Pelaksanaan APBD, Media Perkasa, Yogyakarta

William F. Meisser, Jr, 2003, Auditing and Assurance Service, A Systematic Approach.




Anda Pengunjung Ke- Flag Counter