Article Sidebar

Download
PDF
Statistic
Read Counter : 1933 Download : 1135

Main Article Content

Abstract

An Unqualified Opinion (Opini Wajar Tanpa Pengecualian) is an assessment provided by the Audit Board of Indonesia to state institutions whose financial management is deemed appropriate. However, it is often observed that entities receiving the An Unqualified Opinion designation are subsequently found to have engaged in criminal acts of corruption, which raises public doubts concerning the credibility of BPK's assessments. This study elucidates the correlation between BPK's authority to issue opinions and efforts to combat corrupt practices. The research methodology employed is juridical-normative with a legislative and case-based approach. The findings indicate that Audit Board of Indonesia plays a pivotal role in the fight against corruption. Audit Board of Indonesia 's authority to provide opinions hinges on compliance with the relevant legislation, suggesting that Audit Board of Indonesia can detect the presence or absence of criminal elements committed by the audited entities. The occurrence of corruption cases involving An Unqualified Opinion recipients is primarily due to opportunities and disclosure gaps in the audit process. A correlation exists between Audit Board of Indonesia 's opinions and anti-corruption efforts, albeit limited to the specific category of corruption related to the state's financial scope under Article 2 of Law No. 17/2003. Thus, Audit Board of Indonesia can only identify cases of corruption directly linked to the state's finances, namely Corruption Adversely Affecting State Finances under Articles 2 and 3 of Law No. 31/1999 and Embezzlement in Office under Article 8 of Law No. 20/2001.

Keywords

criminal corruption state finance unqualified opinion

Article Details

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

How to Cite
Ihfan, A. N. (2023). THE CORRELATION BETWEEN THE UNQUALIFIED OPINION BY THE AUDIT BOARD OF INDONESIA AND ANTI CORRUPTION ACT. Jurnal Bina Mulia Hukum, 8(1), 128-143. Retrieved from https://jurnal.fh.unpad.ac.id/index.php/jbmh/article/view/1239
Download Citation
Endnote/Zotero/Mendeley (RIS)
BibTeX

References

  1. Book
  2. Adami Chazawi, Hukum Pidana Korupsi Di Indonesia, Rajawali Pers, Jakarta: 2016.
  3. Malayu S. P. Hasibuan, Manajemen Sumber Daya Manusia Edisi Revisi, Bumi Aksara, Jakarta: 2016.
  4. Peter Mahmud Marzuki, Penelitian Hukum Edisi Revisi, Kencana Prenada Media Group, Jakarta: 2017.
  5. Theodorus M. Tuanakotta, Menghitung Kerugian Keuangan Negara Dalam Tindak Pidana Korupsi, Salemba Empat, Jakarta: 2009.
  6. Victor Imanuel W. Nalle, Konsep Uji Materiil, Setara Press, Malang: 2013.
  7. Journal
  8. Ahmad Rukbil D. Sowikromo, “Pemerasan Oleh Pegawai Negeri Menurut Undang-Undang No. 31 Tahun 1999 Jo Undang-Undang No 20 Tahun 2001 Tentang Tindak Pidana Korupsi”, Lex Privatum, Vol. 5, No. 8, 2017.
  9. Arnold Nicodemus Musa, "Kajian Hukum Atas Opini BPK RI Terhadap Laporan Pengelolaan Dan Pertanggungjawaban Keuangan Pemerintah Daerah (Studi Kasus Pada Pemerintah Kabupaten Halmahera Barat)", Lex et Societatis, Vol. III, No. 2, 2015.
  10. Dadang Suwanda, "Factors Affecting Quality of Local Government Financial Statements to Get Unqualified Opinion (WTP) of Audit Board of the Republic of Indonesia (BPK)", Research Journal of Finance and Accounting, Vol. 6, No. 4, 2015.
  11. Dani Habibi dan Ian Aji Hermawan, "Perluasan Kewenangan Badan Pemeriksa Keuangan Dalam Mengawasi Keuangan Negara Di Lingkup Pemerintahan Daerah", Veritas et Justitia: Jurnal Ilmu Hukum, Vol. 6, No. 2, 2020.
  12. I Gusti Agung Satria Wedantha dan Anak Agung Ari Atu Dewi, “Penyuapan Sebagai Bentuk Gratifikasi Dalam Tindak Pidana Korupsi”, Kertha Wicara, Vol. 4, No. 3, 2015.
  13. Ismail, “Kajian Yuridis Terhadap Tindak Pidana Korupsi”, Jurnal Legalite: Jurnal Perundang-Undangan dan Hukum Pidana Islam, Vol. 2, No. II, 2017.
  14. Mohammad Iqbal, Gudono, dan Irwan Taufiq Ritonga, “Apakah Kecukupan Pengungkapan telah Dipertimbangkan oleh Badan Pemeriksa Keuangan dalam Perumusan Opini?”, Jurnal Akuntansi & Akuntabilitas Publik, Vol. 1, No. 1, 2018.
  15. Muhamad Kurniawan, “Penggelapan Uang Dan Surat Berharga Oleh Pegawai Negeri Sebagai Tindak Pidana Khusus Dalam Pasal 8 Undang-Undang Pemberantasan Tindak Pidana Korupsi”, Lex Crimen, Vol. 5, No. 5, 2016.
  16. Muhammad Mustofa, “Suap Menyuap Dan Mafia Peradilan Di Indonesia: Telaah Kriminologis”, Masalah-Masalah Hukum, Vol. 42, No. 1, 2013.
  17. Ramya Atyanta, “Analisis Opini BPK atas Laporan Keuangan Pemerintah Daerah (Studi Kasus pada Kabupaten X di Jawa Timur”, Jurnal Ilmiah Mahasiswa FEB, Vol. 1, No. 1, 2013.
  18. Sri Nur Hari Susanto, ”Metode Perolehan Dan Batas-Batas Wewenang Pemerintahan”, Administrative Law & Governance Journal, Vol. 3, No. 3, 2020.
  19. Wicipto Setiadi, “Korupsi Di Indonesia (Penyebab, Bahaya, Hambatan dan Upaya Pemberantasan, Serta Regulasi”, Jurnal Legislasi Indonesia, Vol. 15, No. 3, 2018.
  20. Yudi Avalon, Noer Azam Achsani, dan Arief Tri Hardiyanto, "The Relationship Between The Audit Board Of The Republic Of Indonesia’s (BPK) Opinion With Regional Government Financial Report And Corruption", Jurnal Tata Kelola & Akuntabilitas Keuangan Negara, Vol. 4, No. 1, 2018.
  21. Yuswar Effendi, "Tinjauan Hubungan Opini WTP BPK Dengan Kasus Korupsi Pada Pemda Di Indonesia Kajian Manajemen Keuangan Pemerintah, Hubungan Antara Masyarakat, Pemerintah Dan Pemeriksa (Auditor)", Jurnal Ilmiah Manajemen dan Bisnis, Vol. 13, No. 1, 2013.
  22. Legal Document
  23. Constitutional Court Decision Number 25/PUU-XV/2016.
  24. Government Regulation Number 60 of 2008 concerning the Government Internal Control System.
  25. Government Regulation Number 71 of 2010 concerning Government Accounting Standards.
  26. Law Number 15 of 2004 regarding the Examination of the Management and Responsibility of State Finances.
  27. Law Number 15 of 2006 regarding the Audit Board of Indonesia.
  28. Law Number 17 of 2003 regarding the State Finance.
  29. Law Number 31 of 1999 regarding the Eradication of Corruption.
  30. Law Number 20 of 2001 on Amendments to Law Number 31 of 1999 regarding thethe Eradication of Corruption.
  31. Other Document
  32. Admin Web Papua, “Predikat WTP Papua kembali Diganjar Penghargaan Kemenkeu RI”, , [accessed on 15 January 2023].
  33. Aryo Putranto Saptohutomo, “Suap Bupati Bogor Ade Yasin dan Deretan Kasus Jual Beli WTP BPK”, , [accessed on 5 February 2023].
  34. Badan Pemeriksa Keuangan, “Peran BPK Dalam Pemberantasan Korupsi”, . [accessed on 30 January 2023].
  35. Humas Azizah, “Raih WTP Ke-10, Ketua MA Minta Capaian Ini Harus Dipertahankan”, , [accessed on 16 January 2023].
  36. Jack Bologna, “The Accountant’s Handbook of Fraud & Commercial Crime”, , [accessed on 20 September 2023].
  37. Komisi Pemberantasan Korupsi, “Ayo Kenali dan Hindari 30 Jenis Korupsi Ini!”, , [accessed on 10 February 2023].
  38. L.I. 2020, “Ragam Opini BPK”, , [accessed on 28 January 2023].
  39. Marno Kastowo, “Membangun SPIP: Mencari Model Implementasi Komprehensif”, , [diakses 25 Januari 2023].
  40. M. Rosseno Aji, “KPK Jebloskan Eks Sekretaris MA Nurhadi ke Penjara”, , [accessed on 16 January 2023].
  41. Putri Indy Shafarina, “Inilah Perjalanan Kasus Korupsi Gubernur Papua Lukas Enembe hingga Ditangkap KPK”, [accessed on 15 January 2023].
  42. Renata Christha Auli, “Bentuk-Bentuk Korupsi dan Aturannya Di Indonesia”, , [accessed on 15 February 2023].