Untitled

Abstract

ABASTRACT
 Article 11 of Law No. 30 of 2002 on the Corruption Eradication Commission gives a mandate to the Commission to make the eradication of corruption against three things; public officials, law enforcement, and parties related to them. With a clear legal basis, the Commission considered successfully meet the expectations of the public in eradicating corruption in Indonesia. However, there seems to be some people that the corruptors and the anti-corruption eradication by the presence of very hot so appear Commission efforts to weaken even dissolve the Commission, the business that is called as a corruptor fight back or counter-attack criminals. But unfortunately, the onslaught of corruptors fight back is not matched by the readiness of the Commission in the face of the counter-attack. Not to the mapping of criminals behind the attack pattern is one indication of the Commission stutter in the face. Therefore, the aim of this study was to provide input to the Commission on the strategy in the face of any backlash against the Commission. To achieve these objectives are at least three things that must be studied in depth to prevent and counter any corruptor fight back. First, learn about the types of corruptor fight back. Second, read the pattern or the workings of corruptor fight back. Third, determine the ideal design and strategy for the Commission to prevent and counter any corruptor fight back. 
 Keyword: CEC Authority, Corruptor Fight Back, Corruptor Fight Back Patterns, Strategy to Counter Corruptor Fight Back.

Revocation of Political Rights of The Perpetrators of Criminal Acts of Corruption

“…It is observed that political corruption committed by public officials continues to increase and harms all sectors including education, health, religion, food et cetera (Muttaqin & Susanto, 2018). For Barda Nawawi (2015), sustainable efforts (sustainable reform/sustainable development) are necessary from generation to generation in line with the development of the community.…”