The Development of the Death Penalty for Corruption Committed by Judges in Indonesia

Corruption is classified as an extraordinary offense, warranting the death penalty under legal provisions. However, judicial authorities seldom impose this extreme punishment when adjudicating corruption cases involving fellow judges, leading to persistent and increasingly sophisticated corrupt practices. This raises the question of whether subjecting judges to the death penalty under Article 2(2) of the Corruption Eradication Act (UUTPK)—which applies to professionals like judges committing corruption in their official capacity—is appropriate. The study employs a normative legal research methodology, analyzing statutory frameworks and judicial interpretations. Findings reveal that the clause’s requirement of “emergency conditions” in Article 2(2) of the UUTPK is challenging to substantiate. Furthermore, the phrasing “can be sentenced to death” grants judges’ discretionary power to opt for alternative penalties, such as imprisonment (up to 20 years or life), rather than capital punishment. The study highlights the tension between deterring corruption through severe penalties and upholding the judicial discretion essential for fair law application.