
Application of the Causality Doctrine in Criminal Acts of Corruption
in the Forestry Sector
Ahmad Sofian
Business Law Department, Faculty of Humanities, BINUS University, Jakarta
Keywords: Corruption, Damage of Forest, State Finances
Abstract: Indonesia has been experiencing severe deforestation resulting in natural disasters such as flash floods,
forest fires, and landslides. Deforestation at the most severe level has occurred in Kalimantan and Sumatra,
causing protected species to come closer to extinction and the decline of economic activities involving
neighboring countries. Such conditions have adversely affected state finances; hence, it calls for application
of the causality doctrine in seeking to uncover acts that bring prohibited consequences. Applying the
juridical normative research method of descriptive type is applied, the findings of this research aim to
provide input to law enforcement agencies and panel of judges in applying certain causality doctrines in
adjudicating cases of criminal acts of corruption in the forestry sector.
1 INTRODUCTION
In 2017 Indonesia’s forest area totaled
approximately 133,300,543.98 Ha; at the same time,
during the period 1950-2016, the condition of forests
decreased by about 40% - 50%. It was mainly due to
the commercial use of forests by way of exploration
and exploitation (Anwar Tale, 2018). Based on data
from the Asian Development Bank, it is estimated
that the damage of forests in Indonesia has reached
the range of 800,000 – 2.8 million hectares per year
(EIA Telapak, 2007). At the same time, according to
data of The World Bank in the period 1990-2016,
Indonesia has been experiencing a rather significant
level of deforestation and a yearly basis.
Based on the result of analysis of upper land,
Indonesia experienced the lowest level of
deforestation of approximately 1% or 400 thousand
hectares per year, whereby based on forest resource
projections conducted in 1990 - 2016 a total of 0.1%
of forest area experienced deforestation compared to
previous years, namely 1.31 million hectares per
year. The most severe conditions faced by Indonesia
occurred during the period 2011-2015.
One of the most influential factors contributing
to extensive deforestation in Indonesia has been
landed clearing by forest burning and illegal logging
(Mark R. Harrisom et al., 2009). Land clearing by
forest burning and forest logging creates harmful
conditions, damage to forests, which brings a
negative impact on the community and causes losses
to states (BBC, 2018). In addition to the damage of
forests, it also creates financial losses to the state in
the form of lost economic, natural resources as a
result of illegal acts. (Transparency Internasional
Indonesia, 2011).
Another important aspect related to the damage
of forests is the abuse of power of office in issuing
Forest Exploitation Permit (IPH) to certain
corporations, for clearing land through corrupt
practices. It was initially detected as a result of
extensive forest fires that occurred during the past
decade when KPK (Anti-corruption Commission)
conducted sting operations (operasi tangkap tangan
– OTT) against several government officials in
issuing forest utilization permits (Ryan Nofitra,
2018). Criminal acts of corruption in the forestry
sector occurring in various areas in Indonesia
committed by government officials resulted in the
disaster of forest damage, the loss of protected
species, losses amounting to billions of Rupiah, and
losses of human life (M. Syukur, 2018).
In a research conducted by the Center for
International Forestry Research (CIFOR), as a result
of acts, the state suffered losses totaling
approximately USD3,077/hectar, which has brought
a negative impact on the national economy
(Sustainable Landscape Knowledge, 2016). Based
on the several cases uncovered by the Anti-
Sofian, A.
Application of the Causality Doctrine in Criminal Acts of Corruption in the Forestry Sector.
DOI: 10.5220/0009783203030312
In Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Anti-Corruption and Integrity (ICOACI 2019), pages 303-312
ISBN: 978-989-758-461-9
Copyright
c
 2020 by SCITEPRESS – Science and Technology Publications, Lda. All rights reserved
303


corruption Commission, the Working Committee of
the House of Representatives of the Republic of
Indonesia on Forest Area Encroachment and
Damage stated that corruption in the forestry sector
in Indonesia had caused financial losses to the state.
Based on the research conducted by Forest
Government Integrity (FGI), corruption occurring in
the forestry sector belongs to the category of serial
environmental crime, which causes losses in several
areas (Transparency Internasional, 2010). According
to the wording of laws and regulations concerning
Criminal Acts of Corruption, Articles 2 and 3, it is
stated that corruption is a criminal act that can
potentially cause financial losses to the state. The
second article quoted above contains the words
“which causes," indicating that this article
encompasses a material offence even though in the
elucidation on the same article, it is declared to be a
formal offence. The material offense is a crime
defined in terms of the occurrence of a prohibited
consequence, whereas such prohibited consequence
is defined in the wording of the article itself (Ahmad
Sofian, 2018).
Based on the foregoing, the aim of this study is
to take an in-depth view of the criminal act of
corruption in the forestry sector, causing prohibited
consequences in the form of financial losses to the
state, damage of forest biota, and even death.
Corruption in the forestry sector as a material
offence, which requires the existence of a cause and
effect relationship, generally referred to as the
causality doctrine. It involves a series of acts or a
chain of acts that cause damage to the forest. Judges
and public prosecutors often tend to have disparate
views in determining the acts concerned, in
determining the consequences and the cause and
prohibited consequence relationship. Therefore, in
critiquing such matters, the author will examine the
causality doctrine in corruption cases in the forestry
sector in Indonesia. The aim of doing so is to
provide input and rectification of persisting views
among law enforcement agencies in Indonesia
related to the causality doctrine in adjudicating
criminal acts of corruption in the forestry sector. The
two issues examined and discussed in this article
include positive law related to criminal acts of
corruption in the forestry sector in conjunction with
the causality doctrine and analysis of one court
decision related to the criminal act of corruption in
the forestry applying the causality doctrine.
2 RESEARCH METHOD
The method applied in this research is juridical
normative or dogmatic legal research (dogmatic or
theoretical law research) (Soerjono Soekanto, 1981).
According to Soerjono Soekanto, this method
examines the application of positive law norms in
Indonesia, through a scientific in-depth multi-aspect
approach, namely from the aspect of legislation,
jurisprudence, theory, and principles of law related
to the application of law composition in criminal
acts of corruption and forestry. This research is
being conducted with the aim of analyzing the
development of legal theory.
3 FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION
3.1 The Causality Doctrine
The causality doctrine has the function of identifying
acts which cause prohibited consequences and
furthermore determining the relationship between
such acts and prohibited consequences, with the
ultimate purpose of determining criminal liability. In
such a context, there are acts that cause direct
consequences; however, there also acts where a
certain period of time needs to elapse before such
prohibited consequences occur. Under criminal law,
it is important to apply the causality doctrine in
offences, which cause prohibited consequences,
considering that the consequences occurring as a
result of a criminal event can be caused by either
human or natural factors. At the same time, the
causality doctrine can only be applied in offences,
which cause prohibited consequences, namely
material offences, offences qualified by
consequences thereof, and delicto commissionis per
omissionem. It can be briefly described as indicated
in the table below:
Table 1: Offences Requiring the Causality Doctrine
Material
Offence
Offence
Qualified by Its
Consequences
Delicto
Commissionis
Per Omissionem
The act of a
person is
deemed to
fulfill
criminal
elements if a
prohibited
consequence
occurs and
An act defined
and determined
as a prohibited
act, and it will
be aggravated
if it causes a
fatal
consequence
Act consisting of
violations of a
certain
obligation which
is not fulfilled
(omission)
ICOACI 2019 - International Conference on Anti-Corruption and Integrity
304


if it is
subject to
punishment
under the
law
The causality doctrine used in this article will
help the author analyze the extent to which the
influence of the causality doctrine can be applied by
law enforcers in Indonesia in corruption cases in the
forestry sector. In criminal law, the causality
doctrine is applied in determining acts that are the
most responsible for a series of acts considered as
causes. The causality doctrine in corruption cases in
the forestry sector is applied to identify a series of
acts which cause financial losses to the state.
Theoretically, the group causality doctrine,
namely the causality doctrine developed by Von
Buri more commonly known as the conditio sine qua
non causality doctrine. The said doctrine teaches that
all causes must be taken into account because
eliminating one of the causes has an effect on the
occurrence of a prohibited consequence. The said
doctrine developed by Von Buri was critiqued by
Traeger, as not all adequate factors would cause a
prohibited consequence. According to Traeger, an
act that causes a certain prohibited consequence
must be selected. The theory of individualization
and generalization subsequently emerged from
Traeger's above-described view.
The individualization doctrine is used to identify
a certain act after such act occurs (post factum).
Several scholars adhere to this doctrine, among
others Birkmeyer, Kohler, Karl Binding. The
generalization doctrine is used to identify acts which
cause consequences in abstracto using science. It
was Rumelink, a leading figure in criminal law, who
developed this doctrine. And finally, the relevance
doctrine. According to this doctrine, a causal act is
identified among the legislators. Leading figures of
this doctrine have been Lengenmeijer and Mezger.
Figure 1: Doctrine of Caisation
3.2 Positive Corruption Law in the
Forestry Sector
The criminal act of corruption is an extremely
complicated and serious crime; hence, lawmakers
have provided for it under a special law, namely
Law Number 31, the Year 1999 Jo. Law Number 20
the Year 2001 Concerning the Eradication of the
Criminal Act of Corruption. The criminal act of
corruption can involve anyone, and it can occur in
any situation; hence, it has the nature of a covert and
organized crime, which is harmful to state finances.
Offenses in the forestry sector are open to the
possibility of potential corruption, as there are
numerous loopholes in this sector that create the
potential for the criminal act of corruption by state
officials from the lowest to the highest ranks. There
is three law which can be used to hold perpetrators
of criminal acts in the forestry sector criminally
liable. However, none of these three laws set out
specifically the elements of the criminal act
corruption in the forestry sector. These three laws
are as follows:
1. Law Number 31 the Year 1999 Jo. Law
Number 20 the Year 2001 Concerning the
Criminal Act of Corruption;
causalitydoctrine
VonBuri(Allfactorsarecauses,thereisnodistinction
betweenconditionandcause.Thistheoryiscommonly
referredtoasthetheoryof equivalence.Liabilityis
expandedtoallpersonscausingaprohibited
consequence.
Traeger:Anactcausingaconsequence
mustbeidentified.Thetheoryof
individualizationandgeneralization
emerges.
Invidualization :Afteracertainoffenceoccurs,
Oneparticularfactorhavingcauseaconsequence
(postfactum)istakenintoconsidereration.Birkmayer :
aconditionwhichhascontributedthemost\
Kohler:aconditionwhichbyitsnaturecausea
consequence
KarlBinding:themostsignificantandequivalent
conditioncausingacertainconsequence
Generalization:factoristakenintoaccountpriorto
theoccurrenceoftheoffencewhichhascauseda
consequence(antefactum)inabstracto.Subjective
Prognosis:basedonadequatesubjectiveknowledge
(VonKries).ObjectivePrognosis:adequateobjective
generalknowledge(Rumelin)
Relevance:Interpretationbasedonthe
formulationofoffenceasintendedbythe
legislator.Leadingfigures:Langenmeijer
andMezger.
Application of the Causality Doctrine in Criminal Acts of Corruption in the Forestry Sector
305


2. Law Number 41 the Year 1999 Jo. Law
Number 19 the Year 2004 Concerning
Forestry;
3. Law Number 18 the Year 2013 Concerning
the Prevention and Eradication of Forest
Damage.
The criminal act of corruption in the forestry
sector is a material criminal act that requires the
causality doctrine, considering that such act contains
elements of cause and effect which are inter-related
with the occurrences of forest damage. Based on the
causality doctrine, such a series of acts have an
impact on the occurrences of forest damage.
In fact, the causality doctrine is not mentioned in
criminal law; however, the causality doctrine can be
found in the formulation model in criminal laws. In
resolving cases of the criminal act of corruption in
the forestry sector, law enforcers can use any type of
causality doctrine developed by criminal law
scholars. The doctrine is rather diverse, and any of
its types can be selected depending on the context of
a criminal act in the forestry sector. Accordingly, the
causality doctrine needs to be adjusted to the
extremely heterogeneous context of cases.
Therefore, in seeking the causes in a criminal act
of corruption in the forestry sector, the causality
doctrine which includes conditio sine qua non the
causality doctrine, the generalization,
individualization, as well as the relevance causality
doctrine can be applied. The adequate objective
generalization causality doctrine is an endeavor
towards identifying a criminal event viewed from
the point of view of consequence caused by it. The
cause of the criminal act corruption in the forestry
sector is a material criminal act which requires the
causality doctrine in identifying the act committed
by the perpetrator of the criminal act concerned
because the criminal punishment imposed on the
perpetrator is based on the consequence of the act
committed by such perpetrator. The consequence of
act as intended in court decisions is the causing of
damage to the forest as the fundamental cause for
criminal liability committed by the law subject by
issuing a permit for the utilization of forest without
the right or authority to do so.
As mentioned above, the criminal act of
corruption in the forestry sector, particularly related
to obtaining permits for forest utilization, potentially
creates the ground for the occurrence of the criminal
act of corruption. When the criminal act of
corruption occurs, there is a need for the causality
doctrine, as it is a material criminal act. The material
criminal act as intended here is the criminal act of
corruption, which causes financial losses to the state
as set out in the provisions of Article 2 and Article 3
of Law Number 30 the Year 1999 Jo. Law Number
20 the Year 2001.
The causality doctrine is used to identify acts
which, as a consequence, cause financial losses to
the state in permits for forest utilization. The
relevance causality doctrine has been mentioned in
this article being applied in determining causes
based on existing provisions of the law. The
legislator has determined the causes which bring
about a prohibited consequence through certain acts
as follows:
Figure 2: Acts Which Cause Prohibited Consequences
Based on the Relevance Causality Doctrine
By virtue of Law Number 31, the Year 1999 Jo.
Law Number 20 the Year 2001 causal acts have
been formulated according to the above-mentioned
scheme; the above-mentioned acts have been
defined by the legislator as causes of the criminal act
if corruption, which causes financial losses to the
state.
Based on the foregoing, the relevance causality
doctrine is going to help determine the most
influential relationship based on the prohibited
consequence as intended in Law Number 31, the
Year 1999 Jo. Law Number 20 the Year 2001.
3.3 Analysis of a Decision
A case attracting quite a lot of attention nationwide
has been the corruption case of former East
Kalimantan Governor Suwarna Abdul Fatah, who
issued a Forest Timber Utilization Permit (IPK) for
the purpose of oil palm land clearing in Berau East
Kalimantan.
It was found that Suwarna Abdul Fatah had
collaborated in issuing IPK within a brief period of
time to 11 oil palm companies, for clearing land for
Financial
lossto
thestate
Bribe
Gratification
Fraudulentact
Embezzlement
inoffice
Graft
Conflictof
interestin
procurement
Otherrelated
crime.
ICOACI 2019 - International Conference on Anti-Corruption and Integrity
306


oil palm plantations in the area of East Kalimantan
and for selling timber as a result of logging. In
March 2000, Suwarna Abdul Fatah issued a
Recommendation for oil palm plantation
development to PT. Berau Perkasa Mandiri, a
company from the Surya Dumai group on an area of
18,000 Ha in accordance with the letter of the
Governor Head of Level I Region of East
Kalimantan No.: 521/2182/Proda.2.2/EK dated
March 1, 2000.
It was found that prior to issuing a
recommendation to the said company, 10 (ten) other
companies had been granted Permit for Timber
Utilization (IPK) on a total area of 182,850 ha, as
well as Principle Approval for Land Clearing and
Timber Utilization. None of such companies had
obtained Plantation Business Permit (IUP), as
provided for in the Decree of the Minister of
Forestry and Plantations Number: 107/Kpts-II/1999
Concerning Plantation Business Permits. In addition
to the company permits being incomplete, based on
Decree of the Minister of Forestry and Plantations
No. 107/Kpts-II/1999 dated March 3, 1999,
Concerning Plantation Business Permits, the
defendant did not have the authority to issue land
clearing permits.
In order to facilitate the above described brief
permit process, the defendant had granted
dispensation from the obligation to deposit
reboisation funds in each IPK issued and IPK
extension, while the companies were obligated to
submit a Bank guaranty for such PSDH-DR IPK.
Consequently, the defendant was reported by the
Anti-corruption Commission (KPK) on April 4,
2006 as being suspicious and having enriched a
certain group of people, due to the great number of
permits not meeting the requirements set forth in the
Decree of the Minister of Forestry and Plantations
No.107/Kpts-II/1999 dated March 3, 1999
Concerning Plantation Business Permits. As a
consequence of such an act, the state suffered a loss
of IDR346.7 billion and the damage of the function
of the forest in the territory of Berau East
Kalimantan.
The Public Prosecutor’s claim reads as follows:
1. Declare Defendant Suwarna Abdul Fatah as
having been proven guilty of committing the
criminal act of corruption as set out and
subject to criminal punishment under Article 2
Paragraph (1) Jo. Article 18 of Law Number
31 the Year 1999 Concerning the Eradication
of the Criminal Act of Corruption as amended
and supplemented with Law Number 20 the
Year 2001 Concerning Amendment of Law
Number 31 the Year 1999 Concerning the
Eradication of the Criminal Act of Corruption
Jo. Article 55 paragraph (1) 1st of the
Criminal Code Jo. Article 64 paragraph (1) of
the Criminal Code as set out in the primary
charges;
2. Impose criminal punishment on defendant
Suwarna Abdul Fatah in the form of the
criminal punishment of imprisonment for 7
(seven) years deducted by the time spent in
detention and a fine of IDR250,000,000.- (two
hundred and fifty million rupiahs) subsidiary 6
(six months of incarceration ordering that the
convict be kept in detention;
The Anti-corruption Court at the Central Jakarta
District Court in its decision Number :
18/Pid.B/TPK/2006/PN.Jkt.Pst, “Declaring
Defendant Suwarna Abdul Fatah as having been
validly and convincingly proven guilty of
committing the the criminal act of ”Corruption
jointly and continuously” and “Impose therefore the
criminal punishment on the defendant in the form of
criminal punishment of imprisonment for 1 (one)
year and 6 (six) months and the fine of
IDR200,000,000 (two hundred million rupiah) if
such fine is not paid it shall be substituted with the
criminal punishment of incarceration for 3 (three)
months”. In its decision at the cassation level, the
Supreme Court subsequently affirmed the appeal
decision at the DKI Jakarta High Court, rejecting the
cassation filed by the Cassation Petitioner I
Prosecutor/Public Prosecutor of the Anti-corruption
Commission (KPK) and Cassation Petitioner from
Defendant Suwarna Abdul Fatah mentioned above.
Based on the judge’s above-described
considerations, analyzed using the causality doctrine
applied the act of issuing forest utilization permit
caused financial losses to the state. The causality
doctrine was used to identify a series of acts which
caused financial losses to the state and the damage
of the forest, including causal relationships, which
requires the judge’s ability to engage in logical legal
reasoning in resolving such case. In a series of acts
in the criminal act of corruption in the forestry sector
in the permit for forest utilization, there is a highly
logical causal relationship mechanism due to the
existence of a regular series of acts, thus fulfilling
the element of a criminal act. The table below can be
referred to in proving an act committed by the
perpetrator of a criminal act:
Application of the Causality Doctrine in Criminal Acts of Corruption in the Forestry Sector
307


Figure 3 The causality doctrine in a Series of Acts
The above scheme describes the series of acts
undertaken by the perpetrator, indicated in the
matrix of acts committed by the perpetrator in
causing the criminal act to occur. The above scheme
makes it clear that had the defendant not helped the
corporations concerned in issuing the IPK and the
recommendation for land clearing, the forest would
not have been possibly cut down, no damage to the
forest, and no financial losses to the state would
have occurred. Similarly, the corporation would not
have failed to pay tax on forest products if it had not
sold logged timber, and so on and so forth.
As all acts have been aligned in an orderly and
logical manner, the public prosecutor charged the
defendant with subsidiary charges namely with the
allegation of having committed an unlawful act (tort)
which has caused financial losses to the state or the
national economy as set forth in Article 2 paragraph
1 of Law Number 31/1999 Jo. Law Number
20/2001. In the context of the causality doctrine, the
panel of judges adjudicating the case applied the
individualization causality doctrine, namely
determining that not all acts are causes of prohibited
consequences. This doctrine is confined to the most
influential factor in causing the consequence; hence,
the defendant's act of issuing the IPK and
recommendation for land clearing is the most
dominant in causing the corporation’s act of
conducting logging, failing to pay forest product tax
and forest bank guaranty. Based on an even more in-
depth analysis, it becomes evident that financial
losses to the state and the damage of forest had not
been committed by the defendant; rather, it was also
contributed to by the corporations concerned causing
financial losses to the state and damage of the forest.
Based on the judges’ legal consideration, the
panel of judges stated that the criminal act committed
by Suwarna Abdul Fatah was a material criminal act
that caused a consequence prohibited by the
legislator. Accordingly, acts envisaged by the
adequate objective generalization causality doctrine
mentioned above is a series of acts by the defendant
considered to be the cause influencing the occurrence
of a consequence prohibited by law based on the
science of law. As evident in the excerpt from the
considerations of the panel of judges in determining
the acts with the greatest influence on the occurrence
of financial losses to the state:
“Considering that the Judex Facti state "that
based on the statement of expert witness from BPKP
and documentary evidence in the form of Report on
the Calculation of Financial Losses to the State
Number: SR-868/D.6/I/2006, dated October 4, 2006,
it has been proven that financial losses occurred to
the state as a consequence of issuing an IPK which
is not compliant with the technical requirements in
the Forestry and Plantation sector.”
In the said excerpt from the decision, the panel of
judges is seeking to determine an act by looking at
the factor of subsequently occurring events (post-
factum), with financial losses to the state occurring
due to the defendant’s act of issuing an IPK (Permit
for Timber Utilization) which is not compliant with
technical requirement in the Forestry and Plantation
sector.
In the above mentioned excerpt from the relevant
article, the public prosecutor’s main focus is on the
interpretation of the “unlawful act” (tort) as the
definition of offence, which is relevant to the
defendant’s act which caused financial losses to the
state, being an act contradictory to the technical
requirements in the forestry and plantation sector.
Based on the above reasoning, the following is
an illustration of the relevance causality doctrine
applied by the public prosecutor:
Figure 4: The prosecutor’s relevance causality doctrine
logic
Helped issue IPK and
recommendation for
forest clearing
Used forest products by way of
logging and land clearing for oil palm
plantation
Sold logged timber
Failed to pay tax for the
utilization of forest products
and forest Bank Guaranty
Damage to the forest
and inflicted financial
losses to the state
Article2paragraph1
ofLaw31/1999Jo.
Law20/2001
Anypersonunlawfully
undertakinganactto
enrichhimself/herself
oranotherpersonor
acorporationwhich
canpotentiallyinflict
afinanciallossonthe
stateorthenational
economy
State
finances
Unlawful
act
Enricha
corporation
ICOACI 2019 - International Conference on Anti-Corruption and Integrity
308


4 CLOSING
4.1 Conclusion
In the criminal act corruption in the forestry sector,
there are two articles frequently applied for indicting
perpetrators. It is expected that the provisions of
those two articles are capable of eradicating the
criminal act of corruption in the forestry sector, in
particular, considering that criminal acts of
corruption in the forestry sector cause financial
losses to the state and cause damage to the forest.
The provisions of the said articles have been largely
used by law enforcers in handling the criminal act of
corruption in the forestry sector; however, they are
still considered incapable of overcoming the
criminal act of corruption in the forestry sector in
general. It has been mainly due to the disparate
interpretation of the formulation of offence, as a
result of which the Law is yet to be optimally
applied in the eradication of the criminal act of
corruption in the forestry sector. In the said
provision, the criminal act of corruption in the
forestry sector should be understood as a material
offence, so that the causality doctrine can be applied.
In court decisions at the first instance, the
adequate objective generalization causality doctrine
is applied, whereas, in appeal decisions, the panel of
judges chooses to apply the relevance causality
doctrine. The function of both of the said causality
doctrines is to determine acts which cause prohibited
consequences as provided for under the law;
however, the consideration is based on acts
considered based on science and the formulation of
certain laws and regulations. At the same time, in
determining acts that cause prohibited consequences,
the Supreme Court tends to apply the relevance
causality doctrine. In the legal considerations of
Supreme Court justices it is stated that the
consideration applied by the panel of judges at the
appeal level was deemed to be more systematic and
logical in determining an act causing a prohibited
consequence, based on the interpretation of the
formulation of a certain law, and it has more
adequate relevance to the consequence which
occurred. It is therefore evident from the foregoing
that in cases of the criminal act of corruption in the
forestry sector, the relevance causality doctrine is
applied in seeking to identify an act which causes
the occurrence of financial losses to the state.
4.2 Recommendations
Based on the author’s research concerning the
causality doctrine in the criminal act of corruption in
the forestry sector, there is a need for an equal
distribution of understanding of the causality
doctrine. To date, there still a gap in understanding
the causality doctrine among prosecutors and judges.
By closing such a gap, the causality doctrine could
be explored in a more insightful manner and aptly
applied in seeking to identify acts that cause
financial losses to the state, both in indictments, the
Public Prosecutor’s claim, as well as in the judge’s
verdict. Thus, applying the causality doctrine in
cases of the criminal act corruption in the forestry
sector would be helpful to prosecutors as well as
judges in determining the liability of perpetrators of
the criminal act of corruption in the forestry sector in
a logical and juridical manner.
In court decisions, judges would have to include
a certain type of causality doctrine in their
considerations, thus creating a solid basis for such
decisions from the doctrinal as well as juridical point
of view. In the context of criminal acts in the
forestry sector, causing financial losses to the state,
it would be important to include the causality
doctrine in the considerations underlying the judges'
decision. By doing so, it would be possible to seek
criminal liability for acts that cause financial losses
to the state.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The author would like Bina Nusantara University to
provide supports.
REFERENCES
BOOKS
Abidin Farid, Zainal. Hukum Pidana I. [Criminal Law]
Jakarta: Sinar Grafika, 1995.
Bemmelen, Van. Hukum Pidana I Hukum Pidana Material
Bagian Umum. [Criminal Law I Material Criminal
Law General Part] Bandung: Binacipta, 1987.
EIA Telapak. Raksasa Dasamuka: Kejahatan, Korupsi dan
Ketidak Adilan di Indonesia. [The Giant with Many
Faces: Crime, Corruption and Injustice in Indonesia]
Bogor: EIA, 2007.
Enviromental Investigation Agency and Telapak. Raksasa
Dasamuka: Kejahatan Kehutanan, Corruption dan
Ketidakadilan di Indonesia. [The Giant with Many
Application of the Causality Doctrine in Criminal Acts of Corruption in the Forestry Sector
309


Faces: Crime, Corruption and Injustice in Indonesia]
Bogor: Telapak, 2007.
Fathul, Mufti Barri et. al., Deforestation Tanpa Henti
Potret Deforestation di Sumatera Utara Kalimantan
Timur dan Maluku Utara. [Deforestation Without An
End A Portrait of Deforestation in North Sumatra, East
Kalimantan and North Moluccas] Bogor: Forest
Watch Indonesia, 2018.
Harahap, M Yahya. Pembahasan permasalahan dan
penerapan KUHP. [A Discussion of Issues and
Application of the Criminal Code] Jakarta: Pustaka
Kartini, 1988.
Hamzah, Andi. Analisa dan Evaluasi Hukum Tentang
Eksaminasi Putusan Hakim Mengenai Tindak Pidana
Korupsi. [Legal Analysis and Evaluation of the
Examination of Judicial Decisions on the Criminal Act
of Corruption] Jakarta: Badan Pembinaan Hukum
Nasional Departemen Hukum dan HAM RI, 2009.
Johnston, Michael dan Arnold J. Political Corruption :
Concepts & Contexts Third Edition. London:
Transaction Publishers, 2011.
Kartanegara, Satochid. Hukum Pidana. [Criminal Law]
Jakarta: Balai Lektur Mahasiswa, 1965.
Ministry of the Environment and Forestry. Deforestation
Indonesia 2013-2014. Jakarta: Kementerian
Lingkungan Hidup dan Kehutanan, 2015.
Komisi Pemberantasan Korupsi [Anti-corruption
Commission]. Mencegah Kerugian Negara di Sektor
Kehutanan. [Preventing Financial Losses of the State
in the Forestry Sector] Jakarta: PNBP Kehutanan,
2015.
Komisi Pemberantasan Corruption [Anti-corruption
Commission]. Memahami Untuk Membasmi, Buku
Panduan Untuk Memahami Tindak Pidana Korupsi.
[Understanding for Eradicating, Guidebook for
Understanding the Criminal Act of Corruption]
Jakarta: KPK, 2006.
Langkun, Tama S et.al., Studi atas Disparitas Putusan
Pemidanaan Perkara Tindak Pidana Korupsi. [A Study
of Disparity in Verdicts Criminalizing the Criminal
Act of Corruption] Jakarta: Indonesia Corruption
Watch, 2014.
Marpaung, Leden. Unsur-Unsur Perbuatan Yang Dapat
Dihukum. [Elements of Punishable Acts] Jakarta:
Sinar Grafika, 1991.
Mulyadi, Lilik. Dimensi dan Implementasi Perbuatan
Melawan Hukum Materiil dalam Tindak Pidana
Korupsi Pada Putusan Mahkamah Agung Pasca
Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi. [Dimension and
Implementation of Material Unlawful Acts in the
Criminal Act of Corruption in Supreme Court
Decisions After Constitutional Court Decision]
Jakarta: Direktorat Badan Peradilan Umum Indonesia,
2011.
Rasad, Fauziah and Tito Febismanto. Laporan Penelitian
Korupsi dan Hak Asasi Manusia di Sektor Kehutanan;
Studi Kasus Perkebunan Sawit PT. Bulungan Hijau
Perkasa. [Research Report on Corruption and Human
Rights in the Forestry Sector; Study Case of Oil Palm
Plantation PT. Bulungan Hijau Perkasa] Jakarta:
Komnasham, 2015.
Soekanto, Soerjono. Pengantar Penelitian Hukum. [An
Introduction to Legal Research] Jakarta: UI-Press,
1981.
Soesilo, R. Pokok-Pokok Hukum Pidana Peraturan Umum
dan Kejahatan-kejahatan Khusus. [The Fundamentals
of Criminal Law General Provisions and Special
Crimes] Bogor: PT. Karya Nusantara, 1984.
Sofian, Ahmad. The causality doctrine Hukum Pidana.
Jakarta: Prenadamedia Group, 2018.
Sofian, Ahmad and Surastini Fitriasih. Law and Juctice in
a Globalized World. Jakarta: CRC Press, 2017.
Tjandra, Riawan. Hukum Keuangan Negara [State
Finances Law] Jakarta: Grasindo, 2009.
Transparency International Indonesia. Forest Governance
Integrity Report Indonesia. Jakarta: TII, 2011.
Transparency International Indonesia. Analysing
Corruption In The Forestry Sector. Berlin: TI, 2010.
THESIS
Hutajalu, Halomoan. “Kerugian Ekonomi Negara Akibat
Penebangan Liar dan Dampak Perusakan Hutan Cagar
Alam Pegunungan Cycloops (CAPC) Terhadap
Masyarakat di Distrik Sentani Kabupaten Jayapura.”
Tesis ilmu ekonomi sumberdaya dan lingkungan pada
Fakultas Ekonomi dan Manajemen Institut Pertanian
Bogor 2010. [“National Economy Losses Caused by
Illegal Logging and the Impact of Damaging
Preservation Forest in the Cycloops (CAPC)
Mountains to the Community in the the Sentani
District in Jayapura Regency.” Thesis in the economy
of resources and the environment at the Faculty of
Economics and Management, Institut Pertanian Bogor
2010.]
Widi, Anto Nugroho. “Penggalian Putusan Hakim:
Penerapan Unsur Memperkaya dan/atau
Menguntungkan dalam Undang-undang Tindak Pidana
Korupsi Dikaitkan dengan Putusan Pemidanaan
Tindak Pidana Korupsi.” Tesis ilmu hukum pada
Fakultas Hukum Universitas Muhammadiyah
Surakarta, Solo, 2014. [“Exploring Judicial Decisions:
Application of the Element of Enrichment and/or
Seeking Advantage in the Law concerning the
Criminal Act of Corruption Related to Decisions
Criminalizing the Criminal Act of Corruption.” Thesis
in the science of law at the Faculty of Law of
Univeristas Muhammadiyah Surakarata, Solo, 2014.]
JOURNAL:
Ardiansyah, Muh Ferry. “Analisa Hukum Pembuktian
Unsur Merugikan Keuangan Negara dan Pembayaran
Uang Pengganti Dalam Perkara Tindak Pidana
Korupsi (Studi Kasus Putusan No. 53/Pid.Sus-
Tipikor/2013/PN.PL).” [“Legal Analysis of Proving
the Element of Financial Losses to the State and the
Payment of Compensation in Cases of the Criminal
Act of Corruption (Decision Case Study No.
ICOACI 2019 - International Conference on Anti-Corruption and Integrity
310


53/Pid.Sus-Tipikor/2013/PN.PL).”] Legal Opinion
Journal Vol. 4 No. 3 Year 2016. P. 4.
Ashar Wicaksana, Dio. “Kerugian Ekologis Akibat Tindak
Pidana Korupsi di Sektor Lingkungan Hidup.”
[Ecological Damages Caused by the Criminal Act of
Corruption In the Environmental Sector] Selasar
Jurnal, Vol. 01 No. 10 Year 2015. P. 2.
Atmasasmita, Romli. “Analisa Hukum Undang-undang
Nomor 8 Tahun 2010 Tentang Pencegahan dan
Pemberantasan Tindak Pidana Pencucian Uang.“
[“Legal Analysis of Law Number 8 Year 2010
Concerning the Prevention and Eradication of the
Criminal Act of Money Laundering.”] Jurnal Ilmu
Hukum Padjajaran, Vol. 3 No. 1 Year 2016. P. 11-14.
Ginting, Jamin. “Pengertian Merugikan Keuangan Negara
dalam Tindak Pidana Korupsi.” [The Definition of
Financial Losses to the State in the Criminal Act of
Corruption.”] Jurnal Law Review Fakultas Hukum
Universitas Pelita Harapan, Vol. 6 No 2 Year 2006. P.
37.
Harrison, Mark E et al., “The Global Impact of Indonesia
Forest Fires.” Biological Education. Vol. 56 No. 3
Year 2009. P. 162.
Kamilia, Izzatul and Nawiyanto. “Deforestation and Rise
of Environmental Movement at Slope of Mount
Lamongan Klakah 1999-2013.” Jurnal Publik Budaya.
Vol. 1 No. 3 Year 2015. P. 73.
Kurniawan, Teguh. “Peranan Akuntabilitas Publik dan
Partisipasi Masyarakat dalam Pemberantasan Korupsi
di Pemerintahan.” [“The Role of Public Accountability
and the Community Participation in the Eradication of
Corruption in Government.”] Jurnal Ilmu Administrasi
dan Organisasi. Vol. 16 No. 2 Year 2009. P. 110-113.
Minggu Widyantara, I Made. “Intention and Omissions (A
Comparative Overview of Indonesian Criminal Law
and Foreign Criminal Law).” Kertha Wicaksana
Journal, Vol. 21 No. 1 Year 2017. P. 2-4.
Pratiwi, Bimbi. “Sistem Penegakan Hukum Terhadap
Tindak Pidana Illegal Loging.” [“Law Enforcement
System in the Criminal Act of Illegal Logging.”]
Jurnal Ilmu Hukum pada Fakultas Hukum Universitas
Brawijaya, Malang 2015. P. 8.
Supriyadi. “Penetapan Tindak Pidana Korupsi Sebagai
Kejahatan dan Pelanggaran Dalam Undang-undang
Khusus.” [“Determination of the Criminal Act of
Corruption as A Crime and Violation in a Special
Law.”] Mimbar Hukum, Vol. 7 No. 3 Year 2015. P.
319-320.
Suryanto. “Hutan Sebagai Sumber Daya Dunia.“ [“The
Forest As a Global Resource.”] Jurnal Info Teknis
Dipterokarpa. Vol. 6 No. 1 Year 2012. P. 60.
Tri Bawono, Bambang and Anis Mashdurohatun.
“Penegak Hukum Pidana di Bidang Illegal Logging
Bagi Kelestarian Lingkungan Hidup dan Upaya
Penanggulangannya.” [“Criminal Law Enforcers in the
Field of Illegal Logging For Preservation of the
Environment and Endeavors for Prevention.”] Jurnal
Hukum, Vol. XXVI, No. 2, Year 2011. P. 555.
Warman, Edi et al., “Kejahatan Kerah Putih (White Collar
Crime) Terhadap Illegal Logging di Sumatera Utara.”
[“White Collar Crime in Illegal Logging in North
Sumatra.”] Jurnal Mercatoria, Vol. 1 No. 1 Year 2008.
P. 12.
Wibowo, Seno and Ratna Nurhayati. “Perbedaan
Pandangan Ajaran Sifat Melawan Hukum Materiil
Tindak Pidana Korupsi.” [“Discrepancey in Views on
the Nature of Material Unlawful Act of the Criminal
Act of Corruption.”] Material Tort Padjajaran Jurnal
Ilmu Hukum. Vol. 2 No. 2 Year 2015. P. 354-355.
World Bank Group. “The Cost of Fire An Economic
Analisis of Indonesia’s 2015 Fire Crisis.” Sustainable
Landscapes Knowledge Journal Vol. 1 No. 1 Year
2016. P. 6.
INTERNET:
Anjasari, Lulu. “Multitafsir, Kata Dapat dalam UU
Tipikor Inkonstitusional” [“Multi-interpretation, the
Word Can in the Law concerning the Anti-corruption
Court is Unconstitutional”] (Online). Accessible at
WWW:http://www.mahkamahkonstitusi.go.id/index.p
hp?page=web.Berita&id=13573&menu=2#.WxAh-
yMxc0m (May 30, 2018).
Anti Corruption Clearing House. “Jejak Kasus : Suwarna
Abdul Fatah” (Online). Available at
WWW:https://acch.kpk.go.id/id/jejak-kasus/204-
suwarna-abdul-fatah (10 April 2018).
Anti Corruption Clearing House. “TPK Berdasarkan Jenis
Perkara” [“The Criminal Act of Corruption Based on
Case Types”] (Online). Accessible at WWW:
https://acch.kpk.go.id/id/statistik/tindak-pidana-
corruption/tpk-berdasarkan-jenis-perkara (April 10,
2018).
Anti Corruption Clearing House. “Suwarna Abdul Fatah”
(Online). Available at WWW:
https://acch.kpk.go.id/id/jejak-kasus/204-suwarna-
abdul-fatah (June 3, 2018).
Anti Corruption Clearing House. “Infografis Modus
Korupsi Kehutanan” [“Infografis Modus of Corruption
in Forestry”] (Online). Available at Available at
WWW:https://acch.kpk.go.id/id/datagrafis/info/modus
-corruption-kehutanan (April 12, 2018).
Anti Corruption Clearing House. “Penindakan Pelaku
Pembakaran Hutan dengan Pendekatan UU Korupsi”
[“Holding Perpetrators of Forest Burning Liable
Through the Anti-corruption Law Approach”]
(Online). Available at
WWW:https://acch.kpk.go.id/id/artikel/riset-
publik/penindakan-pelaku-pembakaran-hutan-dengan-
pendekatan-uu-corruption (June 27, 2018).
Aries, Albert. “Upaya Hukum Jika Hakim Menolak Surat
Dakwaan” [“Legal Action In the Event that the Judge
Rejects the Opening Statement”] (Online). Available
at WWW:
http://www.hukumonline.com/klinik/detail/lt53c6a530
4b5a9/upaya-hukum-jika-hakim-menolak-surat-
dakwaan (May 31, 2018).
Atmasasmita, Romli. “Aplikasi UNCAC Ke Sistem
Hukum Pidana Nasional” [“Application of UNCAC in
the National Criminal Law System”] (Online).
Application of the Causality Doctrine in Criminal Acts of Corruption in the Forestry Sector
311


Available at
WWW:https://nasional.sindonews.com/read/749740/1
8/aplikasi-uncac-ke-sistem-hukum-pidana-nasional-
1371185081 (May 1, 2018).
BBC. “Kabut Asap Riau, Warga Diminta Dievakuasi”
[“Haze in Riau, Evacuation of People Requested”]
(Online). Available at
WWW:http://www.bbc.com/indonesia/berita_indonesi
a/2014/03/140313_kabut_asap_riau_kesehatan (March
28, 2018).
Beritasatu. “Kejahatan korporasi” [“Corporate Crime”]
(Online). Available at
WWW:http://id.beritasatu.com/home/kejahatan-
korporasi/163628 (May 12, 2018).
Bintang Pratama, Aulia, and Rosmiyati Dewi Kandi.
“Kejahatan Lingkungan adalah Super Ekstra Ordinary
Crime” [“Environmental Crime is a Super
Extraordinary Crime”] (Online). Available at
WWW:https://cnnindonesia.com/nasional/2015029185
101-12-88275/kejahatan-lingkungan-adalah-super-
ekstra-ordinary-crime (May 10, 2018).
Center for International Forestry Research. “Analisa
Kasus“ [“Case Analysis”] (Online). Available at
WWW:
http://www.cifor.org/ilea/_ref/ina/indicators/cases/case
analysis.htm (June 27, 2018).
Center for International Foresty Research. “Kasus Posisi H
Suwarna Abdul Fatah” [“Position Case of H Suwarna
Abdul Fatah”] (Online). Available at
WWW:http://www.cifor.org/ilea/_ref/ina/indicators/ca
ses/decision/suwarna_AF.htm (May 13, 2018).
Edwart, Johan and Fauzan Ahmad Sidiq. “Eksplorasi dan
Eksploitasi” [“Exploration and Exploitation”]
(Online). Available at
WWW:http://www.academia.edu/7302599/Laporan_
Makalah_Eksplorasi_dan_Eksploitasi_-
_Johan_Edwart (January 17, 2017).
Hukumonline. “Metamorfosis Badan Hukum Indonesia”
[“Metamorphosis of Indonesian Legal Entities”]
(Online). Available at WWW:
http://www.hukumonline.com/berita/baca/hol17818/m
etamorfosis-badan-hukum-indonesia (May 12, 2018).
Human Right Watch. “Dana Liar Konsekuensi Pembalak
Liar dan Korupsi di Sektor Kehutanan pada Hak Asasi
Manusia, [“Illegal Funds Resulting From Illegal
Logging and Corruption in the Forestry Sector on
Human Rights”] (Online). Available at
WWW:http://www.hrw.org/id/report/2009/12/01/2560
02 (May 11, 2018).
Integrated Law Enforcement Approach. “Kasus Posisi
Adelin Lis” [“Position Case of Adelin Lis”] (Online).
Available at WWW:
http://www.cifor.org/ilea/_ref/ina/indicators/cases/deci
sion/Adelin_Lis.htm (June 25, 2018).
Nationali Geographic, “Korupsi di Balik Kabut Asap
Tebal di Indonesia” [“Corruption Behind the Thick
Haze in Indonesia”] (Online). Available at
WWW:http://nationalgeographic.co.id/berita/2015/10/
corruption-di-balik-kabut-asap-indonesia/1 (March 10,
2018).
Prahassacitta, Vidya. “Putusan MK Serta Solusi
Permasalahan Pasal 2 ayat 1 dan Pasal 3 UU
TIPIKOR” [“Decision of the Supreme Court and
Solution of the Issue of Article 2 paragraph 1 and
Article 3 of the Anti-corruption Law”] (Online).
Available at WWW:http://business-
law.binus.ac.id/2017/02/23/putusan-mk-serta-solusi-
permasalahan-Article-2-paragraph-1-dan-Article-3-uu-
tipikor/ (May 30, 2018).
Sofian, Ahmad. “Dialektika Ajaran Melawan Hukum
Formil dan Materiil dalam RUU KUHP” [“Teaching
Dialectics Against Formal and Material Law in the
Draft Criminal Code”] (Online). Available at WWW:
http://business-law.binus.ac.id/2016/01/26/dialektika-
ajaran-melawan-hukum-formil-dan-materiil-dalam-r-
kuhp/ (May 31, 2018).
Wijaya, Arief et.al., “Satu Dekade Deforestation di
Indonesia, di Dalam dan di Luar Area Konsesi“ [“One
Decade of Deforestation in Indonesia, Within and
Outside Concession Area”] (Online). Available at
WWW: https://wri-indonesia.org/id/blog/satu-dekade-
deforestation-di-indonesia-di-dalam-dan-di-luar-area-
konsesi (May 22, 2018).
Witjaksono, Djati Hadi. “Angka Deforestation Tahun
2016-2017 Menurun“ [“Deforestation Figures for
2016-2017 on the Decline”] (Online). Available at
WWW:
http://ppid.menlhk.go.id/siaran_pers/browse/1025
(May 22, 2018).
ICOACI 2019 - International Conference on Anti-Corruption and Integrity
312