A COMPARISON BETWEEN INDONESIAN AND MALAYSIAN ANTI-CORRUPTION LAWS

Corruption is quite a complicated problem. It has made many countries, including Indonesia, to ratify the United Nations Convention Against Corruption (UNCAC). It is an effort to prevent and to eradicate corruption with international cooperation. Unfortunately, several studies have revealed that Indonesia is experiencing a legal vacuum on corruption because Indonesia only adopts a few points of the United Nations Convention Against Corruption in written regulations. The legal vacuum causes difficulties in the resolution of corruption cases. Compared to other countries, the Indonesia Corruption Perceptions Index is still quite high. It leads to some questions that are addressed in this study. First, why does Indonesia not adopt all articles of the United Nations Convention Against Corruption? Second, how are corruption cases in Indonesia managed after the ratification? Third, how is the comparison of the law to the Malaysia law? To answer the questions, this study used a normative method. It employed the analysis of primary and secondary data assisted using the nVivo 12 application. The study revealed that Indonesia cannot ratify all articles because Indonesia needs some adjustments to meet the required proportions before the new laws are passed. After the ratification, Indonesia seems to have better regulations and adequate existing conditions. Lastly, laws or regulations in Malaysia are more dynamic than Indonesia.