To What Extent Do Judges’ Ideology and Institutional Justice Influence Corruption Adjudication?

Studies have shown that judges’ ideology is a human-based tool for assessing the kinds of responses in their decision-making to bring justice. Sometimes, however, human judges struggle under pressure from the institution. This paper attempts to serve the Indonesian perspectives of judges’ ideology and institutional policy in corruption adjudication, which is mostly questioned by the public due to unreliable judges’ consideration, and it has led to disparity and leniency in punishment for corruptors. Through a comparative analysis of the U.S. and Indonesia, I argue that the ideology and institutional policy are crucial and need to be understood in Indonesian law, given its multicultural nature and diverse perspectives on sentencing. Additionally, the methods for measuring ideology are discussed in this review, with several potential factors that may affect the judges’ decisions, such as their backgrounds, experiences, and institutional pressures. To conclude, the leniency of sanctions for the corruptor could be an ideological reason for the judges on the dockets. Therefore, this research is essential for developing the area of Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) on peace, justice, and strong institutions. I recommend that the following research focus on a deep understanding of the reasons for judges’ decision-making in criminal proceedings.