The Relationship between Money Laundering Law and Criminal Act

of Corruption

Budi Bahreisy, Bismar Nasution and Ediwarman

Doctoral Program Faculty of Law, University of North Sumatera, Medan, Indonesia

Keywords: Money Laundering Crime, Corruption Crime, State Finance.

Abstract: Lately, corruption has become hot topic, both in printed media, electronic and in seminars, workshops,

discussions, and so on. The assets acquired from corruption crimes are usually not directly applicable due to

fear or indication of money laundering activities. For that usually the perpetrators attempt to hide the origin

of these assets by putting them into the banking system (financial system). The issues raised in this research

are the relationship between corruption crime and money laundering and how the implementation of money

laundering law influences the state losses from corruption in Supreme Court decision. 1605K / Pid.Sus /

2014. The results show that Corruption Crime with Money Laundering Act has a very close relationship.

This can be clearly seen in Article 2 paragraph (1) of Law no. 8 of 2010. Money laundering law in

eradicating corruption in Supreme Court Decision No: 1605 K / Pid.Sus / 2014 District Court judges is

applied in Law no. 8 year 2010 to the corruption case, namely by imposing a sentence of 5 years in prison, a

fine, paying a replacement money, and seizing assets owned by the defendant from the proceeds of a crime.

1 INTRODUCTION

Corruption has become a crime in society and state.

State losses caused by corruption have been

categorized as "harmful". Corruption in Indonesia is

an emergency eating up the nation of Indonesia from

time to time in a relatively long time span so that a

special court of corruption is expected to help

resolving a number of past corruption crimes in

order to recover state's lost property (Kholis, 2010).

Corruption at the present timebecomes the

headline, both in printed media, electronic and in

seminars, workshops, discussions, and so on.

Corruption has become a serious problem for the

nation of Indonesia, because it has systematically

penetrated the whole line of community life,

creating a negative stigma for the country and the

nation of Indonesia in the international community.

Various ways have been taken to eradicate

corruption along with the increasingly sophisticated

(Sophisticated) operandi mode of criminal

corruption (Chaerudin, 2008).

Basically the practice of corruption takes place

with the cooperation between two parties, namely

the party who takesand the party who receives.

Corruption, cannot happen if there is no party

actively becoming a giver, for example in the case of

someone taking the state’s money using his

authority; if the person concerned takes the money

for his own sake it is an act of corruption similar to

ordinary theft; the difference is only in the operandi

mode. However, if the corruption is committed by

the abuse of authority of a person accepting bribes

from other person/s related to his position, then there

are two parties committing corruption, the party who

accepts the bribe and the party who gives the bribe.

(Djiwandonc, 2001).

The effort to eradicate corruption is inseparable

from the predicate of Indonesia, such as the

publication containing corruption state ratings issued

by Indonesian International Transparency (TII) re-

launching the results of corruption perception index

(IPK). In 2009 the survey covered 180 countries,

Indonesia ranked 145th from 180 countries with an

index value of 2.3. In 2010 the survey covered 178

countries. Indonesia was ranked 110 with an index

value of 2.8, and in 2011 rose to rank 100 of 182

countries with index value 3.0. For 2012 Indonesia's

rank fell to the order of 118 out of 176 countries

measured. This is in line with 2013 International

Transparency report putting Indonesia as one of the

most corruptive countries. Indonesia was ranked 118

out of 175 countries with a score of 2.3 of the total

304

Bahreisy, B., Nasution, B. and Ediwarman, .

The Relationship between Money Laundering Law and Criminal Act of Corruption.

DOI: 10.5220/0008884303040309

In Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Multidisciplinary Research (ICMR 2018) - , pages 304-309

ISBN: 978-989-758-437-4

score of 10 (0-10 index range with 0 perceived most

corruption and 10 very clean)

(www.nasionalnewsviva.co.id).

The regulation on money laundering in Indonesia

was originally stipulated in Law No. 15 of 2002

concerning Money Laundering Act but this Act

specifically regulating the crime of money

laundering was not able to combat this crime. This

law is subsequently amended by the issuance of Law

Number 25 Year 2003 regarding Amendment to

Law Number 15 of 2002 concerning Money

Laundering Crime. Over time, the government and

the legislature consider that eradication efforts alone

are not sufficient to deal with these crime issues,

therefore a preventative action is needed to prevent

this crime from continuously happening. Law No. 8

of 2010 on Prevention and Eradication of Money

Laundering Crime was issued from this thinking.

The crime of money laundering has increasingly

received special attention from various circles. The

handling efforts are done nationally, regionally and

globally through inter-state cooperation. This

movement is caused by the rampant money

laundering, but not many countries make up the

legal system to fight money laundring as a crime.

Money laundering is basically an attempt to process

the proceeds of crime with a legitimate business so

that the money is clean or appears as halal money.

Thus the origin of the money is covered (Darwin,

2012: 9).

Many parties agree that the Money Laundering

Act (shortened as TPPU Law) is more effective for

restoring state finances in terms of Asset Recovery

when compared to the Corruption Act (shortened as

TICKS). The reason is because the TPPU Law uses a

new paradigm in the handling of criminal acts, that

is by following the money approach to detect TPPU

and other crimes (Nasution 2011: 4). Merging

corruption cases with TPPU can be seen as having

its own advantages in handling corruption cases.

First, more actors are entangled including

corporation; second, the maximum penalty; third,

streamline of the return of state assets and fourth,

impoverishment of the corruptors

(www.hukumonline.com).

It should be noted that the crime results are "life

blood of the crime" meaning the results of the crime

are the "blood stream" that feeds the crime itself,

which is also the weakest point of the crime chain so

it is easily detected. Attempting to bypass this

criminal chain by seizing and confiscating the

proceeds of the crime, as well as being relatively

easy to do will also remove the motivation of the

perpetrator to recover the crime because the

criminals' intention to enjoy the proceeds of his

crime will be hindered or difficult to do ( Husein,

2007: 289).

The article discusses a case of corruption that

was decided by applying the money laundering law

in Medan which was decided by the Supreme Court

by the case Number 1605 K / Pid.Sus / 2014.

Chronology of the case at the end of 2012 in the city

of Medan. The Special Criminal Investigation

Director of North Sumatra Police conducted a search

and seizure of documents either in KOPKAR office

or at Tirtanadi PDAM including the workspace of

Dirut Ir. Azzam Rizal, M.Eng. and also the

residence of the Chairman ofKOPKAR Br. H. Subdir

Siregar. From Audit Result report in order to

Calculate State Financial Losses on Alleged

Criminal Acts of Corruption in Billing Activity of

PDAM Tirtanadi Water Company of North Sumatera

Province Year 2012 with number SR-77 / PW02 /

5/2013 by Head of Representative of Provincial

Finance and Development Supervisory Board

(BPKP) North Sumatra, showed the existence of

irregularities causing the financial loss, up to Rp

5.277.714.368, - (five billion two hundred seventy

seven million seven hundred fourteen thousand three

hundred and sixty eight rupiahs)

(www.delinewsindonesia.com).

Because of the crime in case Number 1605 K /

Pid.Sus / 2014 involved a very large amount of

money that can harm the state and affect the national

economy and also to various aspects of community

life, the crime was classified as extraordinary crime

that needed to be prevented and eradicated.

Based on the things that have been described in

the background, then some of the main issues related

to the above problems are as follows:

1. What is the relationship between corruption

and money laundering?

How is the implementation of money

laundering law towards state losses from

corruption (Study of Supreme Court Decision

Number: 1605 K / Pid.Sus / 2014)?

2 METHOD

The method used in this research is the legal

juridical normative research method. Normative

legal research is an approach based on major legal

material by examining theories, concepts of legal

principles, norms, rules of legislation, court

decisions, agreements and doctrines (Achmad,

2010). This kind of research is also called the

doctrinal research term, i.e.a research that analyzes

The Relationship between Money Laundering Law and Criminal Act of Corruption

305



the law, as it is written in the book. In this research

the literature materials and document studies serve

as the main material while the field data obtained

will be used as supporting or complementary data.

3 DISCUSSION

3.1 The Relationship between

Corruption and Money Laundering

Crime

Money laundering crime and the Criminal Act of

Corruption has a very close relationship. This can be

clearly seen in Article 2 paragraph (1) of Law no. 8 of

2010 on Prevention and Eradication of Money

Laundering Crime. Offense in the Law ofTPPU and

the provision of criminal offense formulation is

provided for in Article 3, Article 4, and Article 5;

whereas from the formulation of the aforementioned

articles, it is seen that the crime of money laundering

has special characteristics which are different from

other criminal acts by the fact that money laundering

act is a follow up crime, while the proceeds of money

laundering crime are referred to as core crimes or

predicate crime. So when viewed from the chronology

of deeds it is not possible to launder money without

producing crime (no money laundering without core

crimes) first (Ginarsih, 2013: 6).

Predicate crime is a crime processed in money

laundering, which in the Law of TPPU regulated in

Article 2 consisting of 26 types of crime plus all

crimes with 4 years and above criminal threats. In

addition, it should also be understood that money

laundering is a follow-up crime which occurs

dependently on the existence of a crime of origin,

although each of them is qualified as a separate

crime so that it should be concurrently examined and

made in a single file with a cumulative arrangement.

This understanding will have direct implications on

the evidence that both predicate and follow-up crime

must be proven because it refers to the necessity of

the cumulative indictment that must be combined in

concourses realist approach. The necessity of

combining the indictment also appears in the

provisions of Article 74 and Article 75 of the TPPU

Law.

From the provisions of the aforementioned

article, the criminal act of corruption is one of the

types of criminal acts originally related to the crime

of money laundering. Crime origin (predicate crime)

is a crime that triggers (source) the occurrence of

money laundering crime (Yusuf, 2011).

3.2 Implementation of the Law on

Money Laundering towards State

Losses from Corruption Crime

(Study of Supreme Court Decision

Number: 1605 K / Pid.Sus / 2014)

The TIRTANADI PDAM of North Sumatera

Provincein 2002 has come into Collaboration

Agreement on the Billing of Water Accounts

between TIRTANADI PDAM of North Sumatra

Province with KopkarTirtanadiCooperation of North

Sumatra Province as set forth in the Number 1: 06 /

SPJN / KEU / 2002 Agreement, Party Number II: 37

/ SPJN / KKT / 2002, dated September 27, 2002

then under that contract the Cooperation (Kopkar)

Tirtanadi collects the customers’ bill of PDAM

Tirtanadi, North Sumatera Province. The defendant,

Ir. Azzam Rizal, M. Eng, has enriched himself byRp

5.004.637.000, and from a number of state financial

losses of Rp. 5.277.714.368,00 as Audit Result

conducted by BPKP Representative of North

Sumatra Province in Medan with Report No. R-77 /

PW.02 / 5/2013 dated July 2, 2013 regarding Audit

Report Result in the Framework of State Financial

Losses on Alleged Corruption Crime in Water

Accounting Activity of PDAM Tirtanadi, North

Sumatera Province, Fiscal Year 2012.

Based on the case, the indictment of the public

prosecutor (JPU) is as follows:

First:

Primer: That the Defendant's conduct has

violated the stipulated and criminalized

provisions in Article 2 paragraph (1) of

Article 18 of Law Number 31 Year

1999 concerning the Eradication of

Corruption which has been amended

into Law Number 20 Year 2001

concerning the Eradication of Jo

Corruption Article 65 paragraph (1) of

Jo Criminal Code. Article 55 paragraph

(1) of the Criminal Code

Subsidiary: Whereas the actions of the Defendant

have violated the stipulated and

criminalized provisions in Article 3 Jo

Article 18 of Law Number 31 Year

1999 concerning the Eradication of

Corruption which has been amended

into Law Number 20 Year 2001

concerning the Eradication of

Corruption Jo Article 65 paragraph (1)

Jo Criminal Code. Article 55 paragraph

(1) of the Criminal Code

Second:

ICMR 2018 - International Conference on Multidisciplinary Research

306

Primer: That the Defendant's conduct has

violated the stipulated and criminal

provisions in Article 3 Jo. Article 2

paragraph (1) Sub-Paragraph a of Law

Number 8 Year 2010 concerning the

Prevention and Eradication of Money

Laundering Jo Article 65 paragraph (1)

of Jo Criminal Code. Article 55

paragraph (1) of the Criminal Code

Subsidiary: Whereas the Defendant's conduct has

violated the stipulated and criminal

provisions in Article 4 Jo. Article 2

paragraph (1) Sub-Paragraph a of Law

Number 8 Year 2010 concerning the

Prevention and Eradication of Money

Laundering Jo Article 65 paragraph (1)

of Jo Criminal Code. Article 55

paragraph (1) of the Criminal Code

So the case, the demands of the public

prosecutor (JPU) are as follows: the Defendant Ir.

Azzam Rizal, M. Eng, is proven guilty and

convincingly guilty of "jointly committing the act of

enriching themselves or others or a corporation that

could harm the state finances or the economies of

the state of deeds which are mutually related to each

other" in Jo Article 2 paragraph (1). Article 18 of RI

Law. 31 of 1999 on the Eradication of Corruption as

amended by RI Law no. 20 of 2001 on Amendment

to Jo Law Number 31 Year 1999 concerning the

Eradication of Corruption. Article 65 paragraph (1)

of the Jo Criminal Code. Article 55 Paragraph (1) of

the Criminal Code as in the First Indictment of

Primair AND "jointly committing the crime of

laundering which one act mutually related to each

other" in Jo Article 3. Article 2 paragraph (1) sub-

paragraph a of Jo Law no. 8 Year 2010 on the

Prevention and Eradication of Money Laundering.

Article 65 paragraph (1) of the Jo Criminal Code.

Article 55 paragraph (1) of the Criminal Code.

Imposing a penalty on the defendant with

imprisonment for 8 (eight) years and 6 (six) months

minus as long as the defendant is in custody and

pays a fine of Rp.200,000,000, - subsidiary 6 (six)

months. Paying substitute money to the state through

PDAM Tirtanadi, North Sumatra Province of Rp.

3.698.726.722, - if the defendant is unable to pay the

replacement money within a period of 1 (one) month

after the court's decision that has obtained permanent

legal force, his or her possessions may be seized by

the prosecutor and auctioned off to cover the

replacement money, in case the defendant does not

have sufficient property to pay replacement money,

the defendant shall be subjected to imprisonment for

4 (four) years.

Evidence of 1 unit of Mitsubishi Pajero Sport 2.5

D Exceed BK 111 IU in 2011 under the name of Ir.

Azzam Rizal. M.Eng, 1 unit of Toyota Camry Car,

black color, BK 176 R, under the name of Siti

Solehati Dalimunthe, 1 (one) exemplaar of rights

certificate Number 673 on a plot of land with an area

of 423 M2 under the name of Amransyah

Marpaung, 1 ) receipt sheet signed by Frengky

Manurung in December 2011 for the payment of a

vacant plot of Marelan, Desa Terjun no. 673 is

placed in Medan Sub-district Marelan Kel.

Waterfall, the area of 423 M2 of money amounting

to Rp.185,000,000, - received from Dongang Indar

Muda and was seized for the state and the proceeds

were returned to the cash of PDAM Tirtanadi, North

Sumatra Province.

From that case, the District Court Judge declared

the defendant Ir. Azzam Rizal, M.Eng. mentioned

above has been proven legally and convincingly

guilty of committing "joint corruption" and "Crime

of Money Laundering":

1. Imposing the defendant with imprisonment for 5

(five) years and a fine of Rp. 200.000.000, -

provided that the unpaid penalty must be

replaced with imprisonment for 2 (two) months.

2. To charge the defendant to pay the replacement

of Rp. 2,574,602,354, - and if the defendant fails

to pay the replacement money for 1 (one) month

after the court decision that has permanent legal

force, then his or her possessions may be seized

and auctioned off to cover the replacement

money, and in the event the defendant has no

property sufficient to pay the replacement

money, then it will be replaced with additional

imprisonment for 1 (one) year.

3. Evidence of 1 unit of Mitsubishi Pajero Sport 2.5

D Exceed BK 111 IU in 2011 under the name of

Ir. Azzam Rizal. M.Eng, 1 unit of Toyota Camry

Car, black color, BK 176 R, under the name of

Siti Solehati Dalimunthe, 1 (one) exemplar of

rights certificate Number 673 on a plot of land

with an area of 423 M2 on behalf of Amransyah

Marpaung, 1 ) receipt sheet signed by Frengky

Manurung in December 2011 for the payment of

a vacant plot of Marelan, Desa Terjun no. 673

placed in Medan Sub-district Marelan Kel.

Waterfall Land area 423M2 money Rp.

185.000.000 received from Indar Muda

Dongoran was seized for the state and the results

of the auction were returned to the cash of

Tirtanadi PDAM of North Sumatra Province.

At the High Court level, the Court of Appeal

corrects the decision of the Corruption Crime Court

at the Medan District Court of 18 February 2014

The Relationship between Money Laundering Law and Criminal Act of Corruption

307



Number. 92 / Pidsus.K / 2013 / PN-Mdn requested

appeal as long as the duration of imprisonment is

imposed, so the contents of the verdicts are as

follows:

1. Imposing the defendant with imprisonment for 6

(six) years and a fine of Rp. 200.000.000, -

provided that the unpaid penalty must be

replaced with imprisonment for 2 (two) months.

2. To charge the defendant to pay the replacement

of Rp. 2,574,602,354, - and if the defendant fails

to pay the replacement money for 1 (one) month

after the court decision has permanent legal

force, then his or her possessions may be seized

and auctioned off to cover the replacement

money, and in the event the defendant has no

property sufficient to pay the replacement

money, then it will be replaced with additional

imprisonment for 1 (one) year.

3. Evidence of 1 unit of Mitsubishi Pajero Sport 2.5

D Exceed BK 111 IU in 2011 under the name of

Ir. Azzam Rizal. M.Eng, 1 unit of Toyota Camry

Car, black color, BK 176 R, under the name of

Siti Solehati Dalimunthe, 1 (one) exemplaar of

rights certificate Number 673 on a plot of land

with an area of 423 M2 under the name of

Amransyah Marpaung, 1 ) receipt sheet signed

by Frengky Manurung in December 2011 for the

payment of a vacant plot of Marelan, Desa

Terjun no. 673 placed in Medan Sub-district

Marelan Kel. Waterfall Land area 423M2,

money Rp. 185.000.000 received from Indar

Muda Dongoran was seized for the state and the

results of the auction were returned to the cash of

Tirtanadi PDAM of North Sumatra Province.

From the Supreme Court level, the Supreme Court

rejected the appeal from the appeal of II / Defendant

Ir. Azzam Rizal, M.Eng. Rejected appeal from the

appeal of the cassation I: The Public Prosecutor at

the Medan District Attorney, that is by improving

the decision of the Medan High Court. 18 /

Pid.Sus.K / 2014 / PT-Mdn. On 14 May 2014 that

upheld the verdict on the decision of the Corruption

Crime Court at the Medan District Court. 92 / Pid.

Sus.k./2013/PN.Mdn. dated 18 February 2014 just

about subsidiary substitute fines and replacement

money so that the contents of the verdicts are as

follows:

1. Imposing the defendant with imprisonment for

6 (six) years and a fine of Rp. 200.000.000, -

provided that the unpaid penalty must be

replaced with imprisonment for 2 (two)

months.

2. To charge the defendant to pay the replacement

of Rp. 2,574,602,354, - and if the defendant

fails to pay the replacement money for 1 (one)

month after the court decision has permanent

legal force, then his or her possessions may be

seized and auctioned off to cover the

replacement money, and in the event the

defendant has no property sufficient to pay the

replacement money, then it will be replaced

with additional imprisonment for 1 (one) year.

3. Evidence of 1 unit of Mitsubishi Pajero Sport

2.5 D Exceed BK 111 IU in 2011 under the

name of Ir. Azzam Rizal. M.Eng, 1 unit of

Toyota Camry Car, black color, BK 176 R,

under the name of Siti Solehati Dalimunthe, 1

(one) exemplar of rights certificate Number

673 on a plot of land with an area of 423 M2

under the name of Amransyah Marpaung, 1 )

receipt sheet signed by Frengky Manurung in

December 2011 for the payment of a vacant

plot of Marelan, Desa Terjun no. 673 placed in

Medan Sub-district Marelan Kel. Waterfall

Land area 423M2; money of Rp. 185.000.000

received from Indar Muda Dongoran was

seized for the state and the results of the

auction were returned to the cash of Tirtanadi

PDAM of North Sumatra Province.

4 CONCLUSIONS

Corruption with Money laundering has a very close

relationship. This can be clearly seen in Article 2

paragraph (1) of Law no. 8 of 2010 on Prevention

and Eradication of Money Laundering Crime. Origin

Crime (predicate crime) is a criminal act that

triggers (source) the occurrence of money

laundering crime, so the handling of money

laundering criminal cases have significance for the

return of state assets related to the eradication of

corruption. The formulation of offense in the Law on

TPPU and the proof of the origin crime is regulated

in Article 3, Article 4, and Article 5. From the

formulation of the Articles mentioned above it

appears that money laundering crimes have special

characteristics that are different from other

criminalacts as money laundering crime is ,a follow-

up crime, while the proceeds of money laundered

crime are referred to as core crimes or predicate

crime. When viewed from the deeds chronology

then it is not possible to launder money without

producing a crime first.

Implementation of money laundering law

towards state losses from corruption in the Supreme

Court decision No: 1605 K / Pid.Sus / 2014 the

District Court judges is applied in Act no. 8 year

ICMR 2018 - International Conference on Multidisciplinary Research

308

2010 to the corruption case, namely by imposing a

sentence of 5 years in prison, a fine, paying a

replacement money, and seizing assets owned by the

defendant from the proceeds of a crime. At the High

Court Level The judges only corrected the Medan

District Court's decision which only raises the prison

sentence to the defendant to 6 (six) years

imprisonment and on appeal the judge only changed

the imprisonment to 6 (six) months if the fine if was

not paid by the defendant replacing the

imprisonment for 2 (two) years if the defendant

cannot pay the replacement money. Based on the

result of case analysis on Supreme Court Decision

No: 1605 K / Pid.Sus / 2014 on judge judgment

element it is seen that the case can harm state

finance or state economy based on calculation done

by BPKP of North Sumatera Province and it can be

stated that court judge criminal corruption terrain

based on Law no. 17 of 2003 on State Finance, Law

no. 1 of 2004 on state treasury, and Law no. 15 of

2004 on the Audit of State Financial Management

and Accountability is clearly in line with the BPK in

determining the financial loss of the country / region

There is a need to improve the quality of human

resources involved in the prevention and eradication

of money laundering crime. This quality

improvement is very important, especially in

significant institutions such as Justice Court, Public

Prosecution Service, Police Department, PPATK,

and Financial Service Provider.

Socialization is needed to the public to raise

awareness of the dangers of money laundering. This

is due to the crime of money laundering that does

not harm a person directly, so that the danger is less

realized by the community.

REFERENCES

Chaerudin, dkk, 2008, Strategi Pencegahan dan

Penegakan Hukum Tindak Pidana Korupsi, Bandung:

Refika Aditama

Fajar Mukti, dan Yulianto Achmad, 2010, Dualisme

Penelitian Hukum Normatif & Empirik, Yogyakarta:

Pustaka Pelajar

Kholis, Efi Laila, 2010, Pembayaran Uang Pengganti

Dalam Perkara Korupsi, Jakarta : Solusi Publishing

Djiwandono, J. Soedrajat, 2001, Bergulat dengan Krisis

dan Pemulihan Ekonomi Indonesia, Jakarta,Pustaka

Sinar Harapan

Yusuf, Muhammad dkk (Editor), 2011, Ikhtisar Ketentuan

Pencegahan dan Pemberantasan Tindak Pidana

Pencucian Uang, Bandung : The Indonesia Netherland

National Legal Reform Program

Darwin, Philips, 2012 Money Laundering”Cara

Memahami Dengan Tepat dan Benar Soal Pencucian

Uang”, Jakarta: Sinar Ilmu,

Irman, Tb, 2006, Hukum Pembuktian Pencucian Uang

(Money Laundering), Jakarta: MQS Publishing &

AYYCCS Group

Husein, Yunus, Bunga Rampai Anti Pencucian Uang,

Bandung: Terrace & Library, 2007

Kitab Undang-undang Hukum Acara Pidana(KUHAP)

Undang-undang Nomor 8 tahun 2010 tentang Tindak

Pidana Pencucian Uang

Undang-Undang No 31 Tahun 1999 Jo Undang-undang 20

Tahun 2001 Tentang Pemberantasan Tindak Pidana

Korupsi

Muslim, Fithriadi & Edi Nasution, Menjerat Koruptor

Dengan Undang-Undang Tindak Pidana Pencucian

Uang, makalah disampaikan pada seminar nasional

antara Lembaga Pengabdian Kepada Masyarakat

(LPKM) Universitas Negeri Padang bekerjasama

dengan Pro Justitia Jakarta dan Harian Umum

Singgalang, Padang pada tanggal 19 November 2011

Ginarsih, Yenti Tindak Pidana Pencucian Uang: Dalam

Teori dan Praktek, makalah pada seminar dalam

rangka Munas dan Seminar Mahupiki,

diselenggarakan Mahupiki dan Universitas Sebelas

Maret, Solo Pada tanggal 8 s/d 10 September 2013,

http://nasional.news.viva.co.id/news/read/372962-indeks-

persepsi-korupsi-indonesia-merosot

http://www.suaramerdeka.com/v1/index.php/read/cetak/20

13/09/17/237084/Daya-Saing-dan-Birokrasi

http://www.hukumonline.com/berita/baca/lt52f0d3968ed1

f/grey-area-penanganan-tppu-bagian-1



The Relationship between Money Laundering Law and Criminal Act of Corruption

309