I Wayan Bagus Partama, Djumardin, Eduardus Bayo Sili
This study aims to determine and analyze the formulation of the Discretion concept in Law Number 30 of 2014 concerning Government Administration and the application of discretionary legal responsibility by the government relating to criminal acts of corruption.
The results of the study indicate that Discretion is an important essence of a democratic State, which philosophically discretion is a consequence of the authority that has been given to State administration officials in the form of freedom acting as an alternative to a textual impasse of an Act. The formulation of the discretion concept in Law Number 30 of 2014 concerning Government Administration is regulated in Article 22, which gives a discretionary limit in two respects, first the discretion must be issued by an authorized official, and both discretion must have clear objectives that contain things, as follows: launching the administration of government; fill in the legal vacuum; provide legal certainty; and to overcome the stagnation of government in certain circumstances for the benefit and public interest. Discretion is one part of the actions of the State administration regulated in Administrative Law. In accordance with its nature, State Administrative Law is a stand-alone branch of law so that it has its own accountability mechanism called administrative accountability sanctions. In Law Number 30 of 2014 concerning Government Administration, there are several forms of administrative accountability mechanisms given to an error committed by government officials in terms of good discretionary actions relating to State financial losses or not, which are contained in the provisions of Article 80 of the Act. Law Number 30 of 2014 concerning Government Administration, which consists of mild, moderate and severe administrative sanctions.
Keywords: accountability, administration, discretion, corruption
Full Text: PDF