| Summary: | Article 64 paragraph (1) and paragraph (2) of Law Number 1 of 2004 concerning the State Treasury states firmly that the treasurer and other officials who have been appointed to compensate the state/regional losses in settlements with the dimensions of State Administrative Law may still be subject to administrative sanctions and/or criminal sanctions. And suppose the treasurer and other officials are processed under criminal law. In that case, the criminal decision does not relieve the claim for compensation that has been determined through a settlement with the dimensions of State Administrative Law. The regulation of such norms certainly raises legal issues, which have implications for the Treasurer and Other Officials whose demands for regional compensation have been determined, namely creating double sanctions, both sanctions for compensation claims (internal settlement), administrative sanctions (dismissed with respect) and criminal sanctions (jail, fines, and compensation). To overcome these legal problems, an alternative model for regulating regional compensation claims is needed in Article 64 paragraph (1) and paragraph (2) of Law Number 1 of 2004 against the Treasurer and Other Officials with justice and legal certainty in the future (ius constituendum).
|
|---|