Developing the integrity of corruption crime judges: evidence in Indonesia

This research seeks to further investigate issues pertaining to enhancing the integrity of judges handling corruption cases in Indonesia. The research employs a normative juridical perspective and utilizes a qualitative method that is descriptive and analytical in character. This method aims to objectively describe the relationship between a phenomena, idea, data, or fact. The data collection methods involved conducting library research and analyzing primary, secondary, and tertiary legal sources, including scientific contributions published in academic research databases. Meanwhile, the research employs descriptive qualitative analysis for data analysis. Research indicates that it is imperative to cultivate the integrity of judges involved in corruption cases, as judges play a pivotal role in ensuring a fair and responsible legal system. A judge who possesses integrity in cases involving corruption is characterized by intellectual honesty, a commitment to prioritize their judicial responsibilities over personal interests, adherence to the law, astuteness in interpersonal interactions and other endeavors, adeptness in managing personal funds, and a rigorous and meticulous approach. Perform judicial responsibilities to establish an organizational culture rooted in the principle of absolute intolerance against criminal acts of corruption, bribery, and violations of laws and regulations. Thus, by enhancing the integrity of judges involved in corruption cases in Indonesia through the implementation of human resource management characteristics, it is expected that the impartiality and responsibility of judges in handling corruption cases would be considered to fulfill the standards of fairness and legal assurance. Therefore, it is anticipated that the results of this study will have a beneficial impact on upholding and enhancing the integrity and prestige of judges and the judicial system in Indonesia with regards to corruption offenses. © 2023 by the authors. Licensee SSBFNET, Istanbul, Turkey. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (


Introduction
Today, society has begun to challenge the existence and function of the court institution.The court is responsible for ensuring that the handling of criminal cases and the judge's decisions are fair in determining the defendant's guilt or innocence (Cocklin, 1977).Courts exist to uphold justice, guarantee freedom, promote social order, resolve disputes, uphold the supremacy of law, provide equal protection, and ensure a fair legal process (NACM, 2023).Wahyudi (2013) stated that the existence and function of court institutions is with one hope, that the court can be used as a foundation for upholding law and justice.
According to Adam Smith (1759) in Otteson (2017), justice in the legal context consists of three rules as follows: i.
The law protects life and personality; ii.
The law protects property and ownership; iii.
The law safeguards what are called personal rights, or what is due to other people's promises to act fairly, including: not to kill, not to enslave, or not to abuse other people, not to steal or not to deceive other people; and does not violate a contract or voluntary promise.
According to Wahyudi (2013), the existence of ad hoc judges is necessary because their expertise is in line with the complexity of criminal corruption cases, both regarding modus operandi, evidence, and the breadth of the scope of criminal acts of corruption, including in the fields of finance and banking, taxation, capital markets, procurement of goods.and government services.Judicial institutions are expected to be able to maintain, maintain and increase their authority.Therefore, a program to strengthen the supervision of judges' behaviour is needed through monitoring, coaching and increasing the capacity of judges which can be carried out systematically so that judges are always ready to handle criminal cases which continue to increase both in number and level of complexity (Judicial Commission, 2019;NACM, 2023).
A judge is a state official who is authorized by law to carry out judicial duties, namely receiving, examining, adjudicating and resolving cases submitted to him (Rohaedi, 2020).Rohaedi (2020) stated that judges must have integrity in carrying out their duties and functions as law enforcers.Judge integrity is a judge who has an honest and strong personality, a firm attitude in defending principles, does not want corruption and is a foundation that is attached to oneself as a moral value which is the main principle for regulating professional ethics for judges (Simon Lee in Mughal,2010).According to Rohaedi (2020), judges with integrity simultaneously have qualities where their nature shows complete unity so that they have the potential and ability to decide cases in court in accordance with statutory regulations (Judiciary,2023).The Judicial Commission (2019) stated that judges are public officials whose decisions are examined as evidence of checks and balances from society regarding their performance Integrity in a judge is one of the codes of ethics and behaviour of judges worldwide agreed in The Bangalore Principles of Judicial Conduct in 2001 which a judge must absolutely possess as the main key to opening the doors of justice for society (ECOSOC,2008).
The Bangalore Principles contain six important principles which are a code of ethics and behaviour for judges in the world which were produced at an international conference in Bangalore in 2001, namely independence, impartiality, integrity, propriety, equality, competence and diligence (ECOSOC,2008).According to Value 3 points 3.1.and 3.2 of The Bangalore Principles of Judicial Conduct 2001, the principle of judge integrity is a principle for carrying out judicial duties properly, and its application is that a judge must ensure that his actions are not reprehensible in the view of a reasonable observer (3.1), and a judge's behaviour must reaffirm public confidence in the integrity of the justice system (3.2).
Justice must not only be done but must also be seen to be done.Ironic.The problem that occurs and is in the spotlight of society which seems rather cynical about the world of Indonesian justice is that courts are often seen as not reflecting the values of justice and judges tend to lack integrity (Wahyudi (2013) and are on the verge of crisis (Adila, 2023).Developing the integrity of the corruption crime judges is a very important issue because no matter how complete and good the regulations that have been issued, if they are implemented by judges who do not have integrity, then everything will be in vain (Syarifuddin,2021).Syarifuddin (2021) emphasizes that more and more regulations are being issued and the higher the knowledge you have, the more opportunities you have to take profitable actions and enrich yourself unlawfully.
Therefore, regulations are still needed, and the scientific abilities and capabilities of judges are also needed, but integrity is much more important for a judge to have in terms of making decisions that must always be based on a clear conscience, the values of justice, legal certainty and expediency.(Syarifuddin, 2021).
The problem of the integrity of the corruption crime judges in Indonesia tends to be very worrying, and is proven by the arrest operations (Operasi Tangkap Tangan or OTT) carried out by the Corruption Eradication Commission (Komisi Pemberantasan Korupsi or KPK) as follows: i.
Based on various previous explanations, the issue of developing the integrity of the corruption crime judges in Indonesia is an absolute thing that must be implemented.Therefore, the formulation of this research problem is as follows: (1) What and how is the role of the integrity of the corruption crime judges in Indonesia?(2) What is the relevance of the integrity of the corruption crime judges in Indonesia?(3) What are the challenges to the integrity of the corruption crime judges in Indonesia?and (4) What and how is the strategy for developing the integrity of the corruption crime judges in Indonesia?
Thus, this research is entitled as follows: "Developing the Integrity of the Corruption Crime Judges: Evidence in Indonesia".This article discusses the questions posed in the research problem formulation which include: the role of the integrity of the corruption crime judges, the relevance of the integrity of the corruption crime judges, challenges to the integrity of the corruption crime judges, and strategies for developing the integrity of the corruption crime judges in Indonesia.Furthermore, this article ends with conclusions and suggestions according to the title of the research with the flow of discussion as described in Figure 1 below.

Research and Methodology
The research method used in this research is normative juridical, namely an approach that uses a positivist legal concept which views law as identical to written norms created and promulgated by authorized institutions or officials (Soemitro,1983).This research is prescriptive, namely research that aims to get suggestions about what should be done to overcome certain problems (Soekanto,1986).This type of research is dogmatic or doctrinal research, aimed at finding principles or doctrine in positive law, especially for Corruption Crime Judges.This research is also equipped with a statutory approach, a conceptual approach and a theoretical approach.Then, a qualitative approach which is analytical descriptive is used to describe the relationship between a particular phenomenon, idea or symptom as well as data or facts found during research objectively.According to Saryono (2010), qualitative research is research that is used to investigate, discover, describe and explain the qualities or features of social influence that cannot be explained, measured or described using a quantitative approach.Data collection techniques by taking or searching for secondary data from problems studied through literature studies such as books, journals, theses, articles and others.The data used in this research is secondary data and legal materials consisting of primary legal materials, which are materials that have binding legal force.And also, secondary law is all publicity about law which is not an official document and is a material tertiary legal document (Sunggono,2001).Data collection is taken from reference sources that are related to the problem to be studied.Then, the research stage carried out is identifying the problem and analyzing the data and facts found.

Finding and Discussion
The

Role of The Integrity of The Corruption Crime Judges
As a democratic country, the existence of judicial power in Indonesia is associated with Trias Politica, a classical liberal theory regarding the formal separation of powers using logical jurisprudential tools (Glicksman and Levy, 2022) between legislative, executive and judicial powers into various branches of government (Reischauer and Jansen, 1995).The judiciary is an embodiment of judicial power, namely the independence of the judiciary as mandated by the constitution to enforce the constitution and other laws.For a legal state, the court is a joint institution whose existence is absolute so the independence of judges is required.The independence of judges is closely related to discussing the courts because the courts are the last bastion of justice.Wahyudi (2013) stated that the courts are society's last hope for obtaining justice, and truth and upholding the law. #1.
The role of the integrity of the corruption crime judges #2.
The relevance of the integrity of the corruption crime judges #4.
The strategy for developing the integrity of the corruption crime judges #3.
The challenges to the integrity of the corruption crime judges In addition to its duties as the Court of Cassation, the Supreme Court has the authority to examine and decide at the first and final level all disputes regarding the authority to adjudicate, requests for review of court decisions that have obtained permanent legal force (Articles 28, 29, 30, 33 and 34 of the Supreme Court Law No. 14 of 1985), all disputes that arise.Then, the function of the Supreme Court is closely related to the function of the judiciary, namely the right to judicial review, namely the authority to materially examine/assess legal regulations under the Law regarding whether regulation in terms of its content (material) conflicts with regulations from a higher level (Art. 31 Supreme Court Law Number 14 of 1985).Judges are central figures in the judicial process who are required to hone their conscience, maintain moral intelligence, and increase professionalism in upholding law and justice (Rohaedi, 2020).
Judges as central figures in the judicial process are expected to develop integrity related to law enforcement efforts.The term integrity has the meaning of soundness of moral principles and character, as shown by one person dealing with others in the making and performance of contracts, and fidelity and honesty in the discharge of trusts; it is.synonymous with probability, honesty, and uprightness.In re 88 Cal. 302,26 Pac. 178;In re Gordons Estate,142 Cal. 125,75 Pac.672 (Black's Law Dictionary, N/D).According to the Big Indonesian Dictionary (Kamus Besar Bahasa Indonesia or KBBI) Online (2023), integrity is a quality, trait or condition that shows complete unity so that it has the potential and ability to radiate authority; honesty and the definition of integrity is a manifestation of the integrity of the nation's moral and ethical principles in state life.
In other words, the notion of integrity can be interpreted as behaviour that is complete (cannot be separated) and has the characteristics of honesty, decency, sincerity, truth, consistency of actions, values, methods, measurements, and intellectual intelligence (Hamid & Intan,2023), and values.other morals of a person, which cannot be predicted against the pressures of corruption.and to whom the public interest outweighs their personal interests (Rohaedi, 2020).Therefore, law enforcement will not be separated from the integrity of the judges who play a very important role in the Corruption Court institutions.Judges are the main actors and also supporting elements such as clerks and other supervisors within the corruption justice institution.According to the Judicial Commission (2019), the judiciary is a meeting place for parties dealing with a case to present and complain about the arguments of the lawsuit and their demands before a panel of judges.
Therefore, judges are tasked with examining cases, weighing the facts and legal provisions that will be used, as well as relevant evidence and information, so that strong confidence is obtained in determining a decision (Judicial Commission, 2019).In this context, the role of integrity Judges for corruption crimes will decide cases with their hearts and will create legal certainty, justice and benefits for the wider community (Syarifuddin, 2021).Matos (2018) stated that the role of judge integrity is irreproachable ethical behaviour carried out by legal professionals, especially judges, and has an important role in the legitimacy of the justice system, which must be based on bonds of trust with the communities involved as ethics.According to Matos (2018), ethics is interpreted as follows: i.
Ethics is professional behaviour, in order to inspire judges to do more than just comply with their functional duties as determined by law; ii. Ethics strengthens judicial independence by encouraging the implementation of a culture of excellence, which is the main ambition of every judicial institution.
Based on various previous descriptions, it can be interpreted that the integrity of a corruption judge includes, among other things, having a conscience, confidence, good behaviour, moral fortitude, and prudence in resolving corruption cases.Therefore, the role of corrupt judges' integrity becomes the centre of attention in order to increase trust in the judiciary in general, and corruption criminal trials in particular.The importance of judicial integrity cannot be denied, because this is seen as an element that determines the legitimacy of judicial authority, as a condition for sound judicial decision making and as a prerequisite for public trust (Soeharno, 2009).
Thus, role of the integrity of corruption crime judges is expected to avoid various suspicions of bias when they resolve cases and decide as professional judges.Then, judges are expected to refrain from making informal contact between judges and people suspected of committing criminal acts of corruption, lawyers and other law enforcers in order to maintain the judge's independence and integrity.Therefore, the role of corruption judges' integrity is very important in handling and deciding cases.Corruption judges are also expected to be able to reflect the independence of the judiciary by prioritizing the principles of justice objectivity and personal impartiality as the relevance of the judge's integrity in handling and deciding cases.

The Relevance of the Integrity of Corruption Crime Judges
In essence, law is the protection of human interests which is a guide for humans, about how humans should act, and law is not just a guideline but the law must be obeyed, implemented, maintained and enforced (Tutik, 2006).Indonesia is a legal state in the sense of rechtsstaat, as confirmed by Article 1 paragraph 3 of the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia (1945 Constitution).The concept of the rule of law is clearly stated in one of the sentences in paragraph four which states "...then the Indonesian National Independence was formulated in a Constitution of the Indonesian State,...' According to Aswanto (2021), this sentence shows that the Indonesian state is independent and will be carried out according to law.This means that the law is the basis for actions and decisions taken by individuals, groups, institutions and the government so that there is no power or authority that is above the law ( (Hasmi, 2016).
Indonesia as a rule of law means that law enforcement is the implementation of ideas originating from the philosophy of Pancasila and the Preamble to the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia (UUD 1945) as well as the theory of the rule of law, which is related to the supremacy of law (Hasmi, 2016).The rule of law is a means of advancing and protecting a common normative framework in the form of a collection of laws that complement each other and have the same goal: the protection of life, health and human dignity (United Nations, N/D).According to the United Nations (N/D), the rule of law requires that legal processes, institutions and substantive norms are consistent with human rights, including the core principles of equality before the law, accountability before the law and justice.In this case, judges must be present to achieve the important goal of providing justice to their fellow citizens, a strong ethical commitment must be a genetic inheritance from the professional code of ethics as a judge to carry out the law (Matos, 2018).
Etymologically, corruption is an idea of destruction driven by the weakening of what is called internal goodness, which is described as the reason that justifies the existence of a profession (Matos, 2018).According to Matos (2018), judges must be present to achieve the important goal of providing justice to fellow citizens, a strong ethical commitment must be a genetic inheritance from the professional code of ethics as a judge to implement the law.Laws are designed to protect against abuse and thus influence legal development.The judiciary faces challenges in deciding cases involving genetic information (Selita et.al., 2020).Therefore, the relevance of the integrity of judges for corruption crimes is closely related to generic information.
According to experts in Selita et.al. (2020), generic information is interpreted as a different life, for example in the legal field as follows: i. Generic information heralds the genomic era -The era of genomics (genetic material composed of DNA) which brings many potential benefits and risks for individuals related to justice, the benefits of genetic information in criminal investigations and the exoneration of guilty charges.Genetics also provides insight into the origins of individual differences in human behaviour, including traits relevant to criminal justice, such as impulsivity, aggressiveness, and free will/control over behaviour.For example, the aetiology (source or cause) approach conceptualizes human desire (to act and control actions) as a trait.
ii. Generic information identifies human traits -Human traits are individual differences resulting from complex geneenvironment processes.This contrasts with the common view of 'free will as the ability of each individual to control their actions/decisions and the belief that the will of all sane (mentally healthy) people is also free.Many genes/genetic markers have been linked to traits such as criminal behaviour and others.This information can be used to assist justice, for example, in making decisions about the best intervention against criminal behaviour and so on.
The relevance of the integrity of corrupt judges to generic information is that the judiciary plays an important role in the government system and in maintaining the supremacy of law (OECD, 2012).According to the OECD (2012a), corruption in judicial institutions undermines the legitimacy of public authorities, weakens the justice system and fosters impunity so it is impossible to eradicate corruption in other sectors if judges do not have integrity.Therefore, corruption and lack of integrity in the judiciary is considered a serious problem in many countries of the Anti-Corruption Network for Eastern Europe and Central Asia (OECD,2012a).Integrity is often used as an ideal benchmark for a judge because the term integrity is used as one of the principles of the code of ethics in the code of conduct for judges that must be possessed in addition to other codes of ethics such as justice, honesty, dignity, professionalism, independence, and so on (Rohaedi, 2020).
Based on various previous descriptions, it can be interpreted that the application of integrity to members of the judiciary can be interpreted as a holistic concept that refers to the ability of the judicial system or individual members of the judicial institution to fight corruption, while still respecting the core principles of integrity, including the value of -values of independence, impartiality, personal integrity, decency, equality, competence and perseverance (UNODC,2018).Therefore, the task of judges in the Corruption Court can be interpreted as maintaining the supremacy of law and deciding what is determined by law in a case.Judges are expected to be able to carry out their main duties.The main duties of a corruption crime judge includes, among other things, receiving, examining, adjudicating and resolving cases submitted to him according to the adagium (adage): "Ius Curia Novit/Curia Novit Jus", which means that the judge is deemed to know all the law so that the court cannot refuse.to examine and adjudicate the case (Rohaedi, 2020).
Thus, the relevance of the integrity of Corruption Crime Judges is that judges are expected to be able to identify the risks of dealing with corruption and the typology of corruption risks, namely the basic judicial process, activities of criminal investigation agencies, criminal processes (pre-trial investigations and trials), civil processes, economic processes and administrative processes.The aspect of receiving information about real situations (Selita et.al. (2020) is very necessary for corruption judges, namely related to the relationship of the truth of a case in the sense that the case is correct in law and the constitution.This aims to guarantee the quality and objectivity of the judge's assessment However, the relevance of the integrity of judges for criminal cases of corruption is predicted to face challenges because corruption seems to be everywhere, in politics, economics, the health system, education, and also the justice system (Winter, N/D).Therefore, this aspect of Corruption risk sociology should also be owned by corruption judges when dealing with perpetrators of corruption committed by officials from the executive, legislative and judicial institutions and other elements of corruption such as law enforcers (police and lawyers), and entrepreneurs/intermediaries involved in a corruption case.

Challenges to The Integrity of Corruption Crime Judges
Corruption, which occurs at all levels of society to varying degrees, is a behavioural consequence of power and greed in the context of inadequate governance.(Lewis, 2017).Experts in Lewis (2017) stated that in its various forms, invisible and invisible corruption practices or corruption are covert, opportunistic, and rely heavily on domination and fear in unwritten and unspoken rules.In this case, there is a need for law as compelling regulations and moral justification to be obeyed (Lamond, 2000), and coercive law enforcement is fundamental in law (Hughes, 2013).According to Miotto (2021), a typical legal system that is coercive must fulfil several conditions as follows: i.
Reliance on systemic regulation to drive action; ii.
Citizens believe there is pressure to comply with legal mandates; iii.
Citizens who believe that authorities are less likely to enforce legal mandates; And iv.
Legal pressure applies to citizens.
The integrity of corrupt judges often faces challenges in the form of threats in carrying out their duties, both physical threats and psychological threats, so it is not easy for judges to protect themselves and/or their families (Wniert, N/D).These challenges and threats may come from perpetrators of corruption who are generally public officials and businessmen as well as law enforcement officers (Santika, 2023).According to the Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK) report, from the beginning of the year until 20 October 2022 alone, 31 (Thirty-One) perpetrators of corruption crimes were recorded, consisting of: (1).High-ranking civil servants (PNS) with echelon I/II/ III; (2).Mayor/Regent/Deputy with a total of 18 (eighteen) people; and (3).Private sector 17 (Seventeen) people in Indonesia (Annur, 2022).
Winter, (N/D) stated that judges may face stigmatization and harsh criticism if they decide a case in favour of corrupt people.A situation like this, without anyone's help, potentially opens the way for corruption because one can buy security with bribes, with services, and with compliance (Winter, N/D).Then, the challenges of corrupt judges in handling and deciding cases often depend on the background and views of the judges.The background and views of judges are widely believed to influence their decisions (Ashenfelter et.al., 1995) so exposing corruption and holding corruptors accountable can only happen if judges can understand how corruption works and the systems that support it (Transparency International, 2023) .Soeharno (2009) stated that in developing democratic countries, corruption is the first thing that must be fought, in this case, judicial integrity is a very important issue to be developed.Corruption is systemic and impacts the entire public sector, thereby weakening public institutions (Soeharno, 2009).Transparency International (2023) defines corruption as the abuse of entrusted power for personal gain, corruption erodes trust, weakens democracy, hinders economic development and further exacerbates inequality, poverty, social divisions and the environmental crisis.Meanwhile, judicial corruption then includes any inappropriate influence on the impartiality of the judicial process by any actor in the judicial system (Soeharno, 2009).
Setiyono (2023) stated that the Corruption Court has the authority to examine, try and decide cases of criminal acts of corruption; money laundering which is a criminal act of corruption; and criminal acts as expressly stated in other laws that are defined as corruption.According to Soekanto (2002), factors that influence the effectiveness of law enforcement are legal factors, law enforcement officers, facilities and infrastructure, society and culture.An ideal justice system is expected to have autopoietic properties, namely a system that produces and reproduces its own elements and its own structure (Luhmann, 2012).An autopoietic justice system has the following characteristics: self-production, self-organizing, self-reference, pressure groups and accountability and independence of judges (Winter, N/D).
With the independence of the judiciary and the freedom of judges to intervene in external pressure factors, it is hoped that trials by the press can be avoided.Judges are required to have high professional skills and integrity in carrying out their duties and obligations as enforcers of justice (Rohaedi, 2020).According to UNODC (2018), Corruption Court judges are expected to be able to do the following things: i.
Diagnose risks and vulnerabilities in the justice and prosecutorial systems with a view to recommending measures to address them; ii.
Strengthening the legislative framework within which judicial and prosecutorial institutions operate, to ensure the effective functioning of these institutions, and that real independence, tempered only by accountability to equally independent bodies, can be granted to judges and prosecutors (Winter, N/D); iii.
Provide capacity-building support to strengthen the knowledge and skills of members of the judiciary and prosecution to investigate, prosecute and adjudicate corruption cases; iv.
Support the development of an ethical framework, including the adoption and implementation of a code of ethics; And v.
Introduce training programs on professional ethics and implement effective systems of supervision, accountability and discipline.
Based on various previous descriptions, the challenge to the integrity of the integrity of corruption crime judges can be interpreted as a challenge for corrupt judges in carrying out their duties who may face physical threats and psychological threats that may come from perpetrators of corruption who are generally public officials and entrepreneurs as well as law enforcement officers.The integrity of corruption crime judges is fundamental for the upholding of law and justice because integrity is related to compliance and adherence to existing values, including having a conscience, belief, good behaviour, moral fortitude and prudence in resolving corruption cases.Judges with integrity will reflect the quality, consistency and effectiveness of decisions made in order to improve the performance of court public services.
Thus, the challenge to the integrity of corrupt crime judges is related to the judge's ability to diagnose the risks and vulnerabilities of the justice system and prosecutor's office based on knowledge capacity, skills and code of ethics.It is hoped that the abilities of judges can be optimized through ongoing training and development programs for Corruption Judges that cover the following material: (1) Professional ethics, best practices regarding handling and deciding cases of criminal acts of corruption; and (2).Know-how about supervision and accountability systems.and discipline.It is hoped that the output and outcomes of this ongoing training program can ensure that court institutions can run effectively, independently and accountably.so that the length of time for resolving cases, the costs of litigation, and the effectiveness of implementing decisions can be used as parameters.Therefore, the strategy to develop the integrity of judges for corruption crimes is a very important issue because the principle of integrity is an attitude and personality that is complete, authoritative, honest, and not shaken (Mukti Fajar Nur Dewata in Purwadi, 2022).

Strategy for Developing the Integrity of Corruption Crime Judges
In the context of a judge's position as a state official tasked with upholding law and justice, the element of judge integrity can be obtained through healthy, clean, transparent and fair recruitment and selection (Mukti Fajar Nur Dewata in Purwadi, 2022), Mukti Fajar Nur Dewata in Purwadi (2022) states that integrity must be nurtured and developed continuously through coaching.According to Setiyono (2023), the strategy for developing the integrity of corruption judges is to uphold the law, and the law must have high effectiveness so that it can provide a deterrent effect for the perpetrators, especially in the field of corruption, which in fact is an extraordinary crime.According to Judiciary (2023), the integrity of judges is as follows: i.A judge's conduct must be bound by the principles of honesty and respect, and may require placing the obligations of his judicial office above his personal interests; And ii.
The judge displays intellectual honesty; iii.
Respect the law and obey the law; iv.
Ability to manage financial affairs wisely; v.
Diligence and prudence in carrying out judicial duties; and vi.
Discretion in personal relationships, social contacts and other activities.
Referring to the opinion of the Judiciary (2023) regarding the definition of judge integrity, developing the integrity of corrupt judges is a special and important agenda in the corruption justice institutions in Indonesia.This is considering the urgency of the need for judges with integrity as human assets and human capital in Corruption Courts in Indonesia, where currently and will continue to be faced with the burden of Corruption cases which tends to increase (Santika, 2023).Human capital consists of the knowledge, skills and abilities of people employed in an organization (Armstrong, 2010).According to Armstrong (2010), human capital management (HCM) is about generating and analyzing the information needed to develop, manage and assess people.-people/employees in the organization/company so as to provide a basis for HR planning and to monitor the effectiveness and impact of HR policies and practices.
In other words, human capital can be interpreted as a collection of aspects of knowledge, expertise, skills and abilities that make a person an asset and add value to the organization/company. in carrying out daily work through motivation, ability, and team/interteam cooperation as well as management implementing HCM (Armstrong, 2010).Contribution of HCM to workers, as individual human beings with all their dignity (Hamid, & Hasbullah, 2022, and for organizations is in the form of developing employee skills to increase organizational/company productivity, transferring employee knowledge to the company, and changing company culture.This is in line with Osborne and Gaebler (1992) and Ferlie (1996) who stated that public sector organizations should become more efficient, cost-effective, and transparent and measure performance.The strategy of developing and evaluating the integrity performance of corrupt judges can be carried out through modern human resource management and judicial governance for judges and courts (OECD, 2023b).
Human capital theory states that work experience gained through on-the-job training will make people more successful (Nelson and Epstein, 2022).Meanwhile, the definition of human capital management (HCM) is related to the acquisition, analysis and reporting of value-added human resource management data and direction at the company level and at the front-line management level (Baron and Armstrong, 2007).According to Srivastava and Das (2015), .HCM is a systems approach to human resource management and refers to the discipline of acquiring, retaining, measuring, managing, utilizing the workforce, and treating employees as assets and not just overhead.HCM provides a bridge between HR and business strategy by referring to the concept of human resources (Armstrong, 2010).
HCM is concerned with acquiring, developing, and retaining employees in a strategic human resource management approach (Wright et al., 2014), aligning the organization's mission and strategic goals with the human side of the organization.In addition, the HCM aspect is intended as a set of managerial practices aimed at aligning the organization (Schleicher et al., 2018).According to Stoskopf and Groulx (2023), HCM functions as the foundation of an integrated management system, helping organizations realize full value and increasing the ability to support stronger organizational programs as follows: i.
Employees follow interest-driven paths: Career paths are also enhanced by having consistent and standardized job titles: ii.
HR processes and structures are simplified: such as capabilities that provide insight into global workforce planning.signed to reflect the external and internal value of the work, and iii.
Organizational leaders gain a holistic view of talent components: to see real, direct information about team and employee performance to increase productivity and identify opportunities for career development within the workforce.Then, ensuring accountability, transparency and integrity of the judiciary as an important element of judicial independence and a concept inherent in the supremacy of law, must be in line with the basic UN principles on independence ((United Nations OHCHR, 1996OHCHR, -2023)).Judiciary and principles other relevant norms, principles and standards of human rights (ICJ, 2016).According to the ICJ (2016), the judiciary is an institution that is responsible to society so it must be able to ensure that all judicial decisions are actually made: i.
Independent and impartial; and ii.
It has integrity and is free from corruption, and to this end the public reasonably expects the judiciary to take action against individual judges who commit violations.compromise these values.Furthermore, the primary responsibility for human resource management relating to selection, recruitment, training and disciplinary processes, including complaints against judges, is clearly placed on the judiciary (OECD, 2023b).According to the OECD (2023b), the primary responsibility of the institution of justice is as follows: i.
Ensuring the proper functioning of the courts, responsibility for making policies regarding performance measures for judges and courts; And ii.
Establishing measures for the distribution of judicial and related staff, and strategic directions for the development of human resources of judges will also likely depend on the judiciary.The arrangements made for this purpose in each country will determine the responsibilities for implementing this policy, managing the necessary procedures, and establishing the necessary administrative structures.Then, the characteristics and information supplies that workers have are known as human capital.Human capital can be intrinsic or can be developed over time, and will be useful for increasing worker efficiency (Alnoor, 2020).Human Capital helps increase the vitality of an organization/company by using different efforts.For example, if there are many employees who are educated and skilled, this will contribute to increasing the output of the organization/company because these employees are more capable and creative (Backman et al., 2016).Skilled and educated employees provide better productivity through Human Capital externalities (Cairo and Cajner, 2017).Chatterjee (2017) states that for quality decision-making in organizations/companies knowledgeable and skilled workers are needed.In this context, the performance of the court and the performance of corrupt judges are closely related to independence and accountability.Judicial independence is the duty of all government institutions and other institutions to respect and maintain the independence of the judiciary (United Nations OHCHR, 1996OHCHR, -2023)).Judicial independence includes not only control and authority over each judge's legal decisions, but also, depending on the jurisdiction, a range of administrative responsibilities, including authority over budgeting, information technology (IT), human resources, and authority.allocation of judicial services, judicial selection, retention, assignment, and education and training of judges and judicial system staff (ENCJ, 2017).Munaty et.al. (2022) stated that human resources (HR) are an important thing which is the basic capital of an organization/company, therefore the quality of HR must always be developed in order to achieve the goals set by the organization/company.In this context, the strategy to develop the integrity of corruption judges in Indonesia as human resources in court institutions can be carried out through the human capital management feature as described in Figure 2 as follows: Referring to Figure 2, it can be interpreted that HCM can be interpreted as an effort to reflect the integrity of corruption crime judges related to the ability to develop skills over time and to respond to changes in work in different contexts.The implementation of HCM in the operations of the Corruption Court aims to ensure that the judiciary can ensure that the court can implement the new standards that have been set.Therefore, the strategy to develop the integrity of corruption crime judges in Indonesia through human capital management features in Corruption Courts in Indonesia can be carried out as follows: Firstthe use of integrity assessments in the recruitment, selection/placement, training and promotion system for corrupt judges -Qualifications, selection and training, people selected for judicial positions must be individuals who have integrity and ability with appropriate training or qualifications in the field of law (United Nations OHCHR,1996-2023).According to the United Nations OHCHR, , the selection method selecting judges, there should be no discrimination against a person based on race, colour, sex, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, wealth, birth or status, unless there is a requirement that a candidate for judicial office must be a citizen of the country concerned, shall not be considered discriminatory.Most organizations use a distribution approach in recruitment, selection/placement, training and promotion of employees through a more extensive assessment process (United Nations OHCHR, 1996-2023), and the key instrument used in this approach is the suitability of people with the work environment (Ivancevich, 2010;Sekiguchi in Issah, 2021).
Common initial screening tools include resumes, application forms, and reference checks, which are generally used to identify and exclude unsuitability or poor performance from further consideration (Pulakos,2005), According to Pulakos (2005), other initial Internal and External Supervision screening tools are informal meetings or telephone interviews, which are often used to provide members of an organization with the opportunity for direct interaction with potential candidates.Although this initial screening tool has benefits in the overall selection process.Looking at a proven track record in helping organizations build a high-quality workforce by identifying individuals with integrity who will work effectively, achieve results, and make important contributions to the job (Pulakos, 2005).Then, integrity is the foundation of a good public governance system in the Corruption Court.It is hoped that this will ensure that the Corruption Court in Indonesia is able to work in the interests of the wider community to obtain legal certainty based on justice, not just in the interests of a few people.
The assessment system carried out is by using an integrity test tool in the selection/placement system, training and promotion for corrupt judges is very important and needed now and also in the future.According to experts in The U.S. Office of Personnel Management (N/D), the meaning of integrity tests is as follows: i.
Integrity tests are a special type of personality test designed to assess an applicant's tendency to be honest, trustworthy, and reliable.Lack of integrity is associated with counterproductive behaviour such as theft, violence, sabotage, discipline problems, and absenteeism. ii.
Integrity tests may measure some of the same factors as standard personality tests, particularly conscientiousness, and perhaps some aspects of emotional stability and agreeableness.Integrity tests can be a valid measure of overall job performance.This is not surprising because integrity is strongly associated with conscientiousness, which is a strong predictor of overall job performance.Like other measures of personality traits, integrity tests can add significant validity to the selection process when administered in conjunction with cognitive ability tests. iii.
Integrity tests show that individuals who get poor grades tend to be less suitable and less productive employees.Overt integrity tests (also referred to as clear-purpose tests) are designed to directly measure attitudes related to dishonest behaviour.These tests are distinguished from personality-based tests because they do not attempt to disguise the purpose of the assessment.Open-ended tests often contain questions that ask directly about the applicant's involvement in illegal behaviour or misconduct (e.g.theft, use of illegal drugs).Such transparency can make guessing the correct answer clear.
Faking applicants is always a concern in open integrity tests.The score results from these tests should be interpreted with caution.
Therefore, the use of integrity assessments in the selection/placement, training and promotion system for Corruption Crime Judges is related to the good governance system in the Corruption Court environment in Indonesia by using accurate psychological tests.
The system must be based on objective factors, in particular ability, integrity and experience regarding the personality of prospective corruption crime judges in Corruption Court, both career and ad hoc judges, and an accurate track record test regarding the life history of corruption crime judge candidates must be carried out.According to Gregory et al., (2010), selection/placement, training and promotion system practices related to human resource selection often focus on identifying and selecting people who best fit the existing organizational culture and thus have values and norms.the same as the organization.
Second -strengthening anti-corruption commitment in all elements within the Corruption Court -Anti-corruption commitment adheres to the principle of zero tolerance for unethical and dishonest practices.In this case, corruption crime judges and all employees within the Corruption Crime Court and other related parties are expected to behave in accordance with the principles of the code of ethics and compliance policies.Corruption crime judges and all elements within the Corruption Court environment are committed to carrying out their duties and functions based on the value of integrity and are guided by the code of ethics and behavioural guidelines of the Corruption Court institution, and the Corruption Court institution strives to perfect every business process so that it is in line with the principles of integrity.The Corruption Court has a policy that regulates conflicts of interest of judges, court officials, employees with civil servant status and outsourced workers within the Corruption Court environment.
Any conflict of interest that has the potential to pose a risk must be announced, and the Corruption Court institution is committed to providing outreach and/or training regarding the prevention of bribery and corruption and developing business integrity to all employees in the work environment on a regular basis.and any violations of the Court's policy or Code of Ethics.and the Code of Conduct will be subject to sanctions in accordance with applicable regulations.In this context, the importance of leadership in the Corruption Court institution is important.Leaders in Corruption Court institutions not only handle cases, but leaders must be able to ensure that judges, clerks and other related court employees are ready to conduct effective trials.In this regard, leaders must be able to ensure that judges always control procedures to ensure trials are fair and effective, oversee cases and ensure that they are handled in accordance with generally accepted norms while maintaining flexibility to respond to the unique needs of each case.
Court leaders must be able to carry out the basic goals and responsibilities of the court, and to do this, court leaders must ensure that their courts fulfil these goals and responsibilities and strive to achieve certain goals (NACM, 2023).According to NACM (2023), the relevance of court leadership is as follows: i.
Understanding of the objectives and responsibilities of the court to continuously ensure and guide the operations, policies and procedures of the court in accordance with the judicial authority granted in the state constitution and applicable laws; And ii.
The main responsibility of the judiciary is to provide an impartial forum for resolving disputes.This ensures the supremacy of the law and the protection of individual rights.Over time, this fundamental responsibility of the judiciary has expanded to include other important areas, including but not limited to the following: (a).Guaranteeing access to the court process for all who wish it; (b).Manage court affairs in a manner that promotes efficiency, transparency, and the opportunity for fair and timely resolution of cases submitted; and (c).Exercising leadership among other justice-related institutions to develop strategies that are in line with the interests of the three branches of government, by recognising that courts cannot work in isolation, and at the same time, must maintain their independence.
Furthermore, leadership in the Corruption Court requires cooperation, respect and exchange of ideas and prioritizing consistency in faith and devotion to God Almighty as the essence of the code of ethics.The leadership style of a leader in court will be actualized in the leader's daily attitudes and behaviour both in the work environment in the corruption court and in wider community life.The leader's example will correlate and have significant and positive implications for a conducive organizational work environment and culture.According to experts in Akparep et.al. (2019), there is a significant relationship between leadership style and organizational performance.An effective leadership style is seen as a powerful source in managing sustainable development and competitive advantage, including: i.
The leadership style helps the organization to achieve its current goals more efficiently by linking job performance to valuable rewards and by ensuring that employees have the resources needed to get the job done; ii.
Leadership style has a significant positive correlation with organizational performance; iii.
Without leadership, the possibility of mistakes increases and the chances of success decrease.In this way, leadership, together with stimulants and incentives, increases employee motivation in the Corruption Court environment to achieve common goals, having a relevant role in the process of formation, transmission and change of organizational culture.
Therefore, this leadership style can be applied by court leaders to carry out the basic goals and responsibilities of the court.According to NACM (2023), court leaders can carry out the basic goals and responsibilities of the court as follows: i.
Protect fundamental constitutional and legal rights and promote the rule of law; ii.
Provide access to all persons requesting court intervention; iii.
Support timely and fair resolution of all cases; And iv.
Recognizing that court leadership performs a variety of functions in various environments, including ensuring that the court's mission and vision statements support the fundamental goals and responsibilities of the court, providing education about the goals and responsibilities of the court for court staff, and encouraging judicial independence through the budgeting process and drafting functions.independent policy.
Third -Increasing the independence and accountability of the implementation and administration of trials and handling of corruption cases -The essence of judicial independence is the personal independence of judges, in this concept, it is often analogous to a concept (Kornhauser, 2002).According to Becker (1970), the judiciary has realized its independence if judges can make decisions without fear of the judge.internal (vertical) or external (horizontal) pressure to resolve cases with certain conditions.In other words, personal independence can be achieved when the output of the judicial process can reflect one's judicial preferences.In other words, the independence of corrupt judges can be achieved when the output of the judicial process can reflect the judicial preferences in the form of decisions or sentences handed down by judges to perpetrators of corruption.Whatever the outcome of the judge's decision, it is hoped that it will be able to control the outcome of legal conflicts and accountability.The judge's decision is a manifestation of the results of deep thought, is careful and precise in accordance with applicable legal norms and fulfils the sense of justice of the wider community in general.
Therefore, the Corruption Crime Judges can be accountable for the results of his decision to the Corruption Convict and the decision made is correct based on the judge's integrity.Pimentel (2016) states that accountability is the same as judicial independence, both of which are important foundations for the supremacy of law).From a sociological perspective, courts gain public trust because their independence is guaranteed through legal norms (Neudorf, 2017), and accountability makes the decisions of judicial authorities unbreakable and more respected (Pimentel, 2016).According to Pimentel (2016), enforcing a judge's code of ethics is an important basis as the core of judicial accountability for personal independence, so that access to justice becomes a supporting basis for achieving institutional accountability.In this context, there appears to be a separation of meanings which form the basis of judicial accountability as follows: (1).Judges are responsible to the law, to the principles of higher justice, and to their own sense of ethical responsibility, and (2).Judges are considered responsible only as long as he is responsible without feeling afraid of any external force.
Then, the independence and accountability of corrupt crime judges are reflected in the judge's attitude, behaviour, knowledge and ability to position himself and his actions in a more dignified manner, namely that corrupt judges do not exceed the limits in carrying out their duties and functions as judges and in accordance with the law.The relationship of independence and accountability to the integrity of corruption crime judges is as follows:(1) Judges will be able to reduce cases and other corruption crimes; (2) Ensure compliance with standards and procedures;and (3) Improve the performance and learning of corruption justice organizations.
Fourth -Increase the effectiveness of supervision and community participation.Supervision and community participation can be interpreted as community participation in the trial process until after the criminal decision is handed down by the corruption crime judge to the corruption crime perpetrator.Supervision is the process of supervising the implementation of all organizational activities to ensure that all work carried out runs according to predetermined plans [Demichele, 2014;Liu, 2020).Meanwhile, the type of supervision studied in this research is community supervision as social control.In general, a country has society as citizens and the government as state administrators.Public supervision is aimed at judges and corruption courts as law enforcement officers and public institutions in Indonesia to prevent abuse of power, The role of corruption crime judges in efforts to eradicate cases of criminal acts of corruption, namely adjudicating the process of corruption cases and imposing sentences based on consideration of who the person is, this element is solely to show that the crime is common, one dilitacomuni without requiring certain qualities of the perpetrator, because Anyone who can be held legally responsible can be prosecuted based on Article 1 Paragraph 1 sub-Law Number 3 of 1971 concerning the Eradication of Corruption Crimes.In this case, an emphasis on the supervision and monitoring of corrupt judges and courts is very necessary in line with the increasing desire for corruption in Indonesia.In this case, the community supervision function is the main driver for assessing judge performance related to judge integrity.
Implementing evidence-based policies that focus on risks and needs in terms of decision-making for corruption judges is very necessary, including the principles of risk, need and responsiveness which are based on the principle of compliance in implementing standard operational procedures in handling and resolving corruption cases (The Pew Charitable Trusts, 2020).Evidence-based policies that focus on risks and needs are an effective basis for the community to monitor and participate in the performance of corrupt judges and courts.In this case, the form of supervision and community participation can be in the form of statements or in the form of activities, including providing input of thoughts, energy, time, and expertise, to provide advice that the trial process and decisions handed down by Corruption Court judges have complied with legal provisions and provided justice for wide community.
Sequentially, the strategies implemented are as follows:(1) Carrying out strict supervision of the ethical behaviour of judges as a form of enforcing the guidelines.This supervision is carried out both by internal court institutions and external judicial supervision institutions, namely the judicial commission; (2) Carrying out integrity development in the process, judges work by providing ethical guidelines and ethical standards that must be maintained, and must legally promise to fulfil all the provisions of these ethical guidelines by every Corruption Judge;and (3) Create ethical guidelines for the judge's closest environment, such as court employees and clerks.court.Thus, the target of this strategy to develop the integrity of corruption crime judges is to prevent the judge's immediate environment from becoming an entry point for damage to the integrity of corruption crime edges.
Fifth -Strengthening institutions and cooperation mechanisms between law enforcement agencies in the context of optimizing law enforcement against criminal acts of corruption -Strengthening institutions and cooperation mechanisms between law enforcement agencies can be interpreted as a form of cooperation between law enforcement authorities and civil society organizations that is based on the principles respect each other, protect each other, and promote each other's basic rights.Citizens, cooperation between law enforcement agencies must continue to be developed, either in the form of permanent cooperation aimed at finding material evidence related to corruption cases or ad hoc and specific cooperation.Partnership agreements between law enforcement authorities and civil society organizations will help the country fight corruption crimes and fulfil the positive obligations of each law enforcement agency in Indonesia.
Furthermore, cooperation between tax authorities and anti-corruption authorities is an important element of a whole-of-government approach to tackling financial crime (OECD and The World Bank, 2018).According to the OECD and The World Bank (2018), the work of tax authorities and anti-corruption authorities is fundamentally interrelated i.
Tax crimes and corruption often occur simultaneously so that one of the authorities can reveal indications of violations that must be reported to the other party so that they can be assessed or investigated; ii.
In carrying out their work, tax authorities and anti-corruption authorities collect and store information that may be directly relevant to the work of other authorities; iii.
Legal gateways can be established to support this sharing of information, subject to appropriate safeguards and fully exploiting areas that can be improved and supported by authorities.
In this case, countries can gain significant benefits in detecting, investigating, prosecuting, understanding and preventing tax crimes and corruption, as well as economic crimes more broadly.Thus, efforts are needed to expand the scope and forms of collaboration as well as embed commitment in institutional agreements to assist and ensure the continuity and continuity of collaborative arrangements Sixth -Develop a culture of zero tolerance towards corruption and legal sanctions for all elements of the apparatus in the working environment of the Corruption Court -Corruption is a crime against humanity, in fact, corruption has brought enormous material losses to state finances both economically, socially and culturally (Putra and Linda, 2022).In this context, the task of corrupt judges with integrity is to uphold the right and correct law as a sacred duty.The sacred duties of corrupt judges are the embodiment of corrupt judges who are totally devoted to the people and state of Indonesia, based on the strength of faith and devotion to God Almighty, the owner of the universe and all its contents.In their daily reality, judges are responsible for the courtroom and they must ensure that trials are fair, that is, judges preside over court proceedings, use established laws and guidelines to determine sentences, and regulate the constitutionality of various statutes and legal precedents.
According to the 2023 CSCJA (2023), judges play many roles, including: (1).Interpreting the law, assessing the evidence presented, and controlling how trials proceed in their courtroom; and (2).Judges are the decision-makers who are impartial in upholding justice.
Corruption among judges is one of the main threats to society and the functioning of a democratic state, and this weakens the integrity of the judiciary which is the basis of the rule of law (CCJE, 2018).According to CCJE (2018), judicial integrity is the main prerequisite for an effective, efficient and impartial national justice system.This is closely related to the concept of judicial independence (CCJE, 2018) and its relationship to the implementation of the principle of zero tolerance towards corruption, bribery and violations of laws and regulations.This principle can generally be interpreted as meaning that all judges and employees within the corruption court and third parties who act for and on behalf of the corruption court at every level of the organization are expected to always carry out their work in accordance with honest, wise and responsible values and behaviour.does not, and will not, accept or pay bribes or offer improper inducements or anything that could be deemed to do so.
The application of the principle of zero tolerance towards corruption, bribery and violations of laws and regulations in the corruption court work environment should be an absolute culture to be developed in the corruption court work environment.According to Richard Perrin in Watkins (2013), organizational culture is a collection of values and rituals that function as glue to integrate organizational members.In this case, leaders have an important role in perpetuating a strong culture, starting with recruiting and selecting applicants who share the same beliefs as the organization and thrive within that culture, developing orientation, training and performance management programs that outline and reinforce the organization's core values.and ensuring that appropriate rewards and recognition are given to employees who truly embody these values (SHRM, 2023).Developing a culture of zero tolerance for corruption and legal sanctions in the court work environment can be done in the following ways: i.
Increasing the participation of employees and external parties can act as vigilant eyes and ears regarding potential allegations of criminal acts of corruption in the court environment.Employees have deep internal knowledge and have a stake in maintaining the court's reputation, while external parties can provide a different perspective on their interactions with the court. ii.
Active involvement in reporting by both employees and external parties supports the court's efforts to detect and deal quickly with allegations of corruption, ensuring that the court operates according to high ethical standards.This helps create a transparent and corruption-free culture, thereby strengthening the integrity and sustainability of court operations; And iii.Creating a Reporting System that is easy to access, namely that reporters from both employees and external parties can play a role in helping prevent and eradicate corruption by reporting information to the court through the Reporting System, for example, official court emails or hotlines that can be accessed by the wider community such as Wharsapp and others.
Seventh -Increasing internal and external supervision of the integrity of corruption crime judges.Internal and external supervision aims to ensure that there is input and consideration from internal and external parties (external judicial supervision institutions, namely the judicial commission).This is intended to determine the necessary policies and actions related to the implementation of the duties and functions of the court as well as the behaviour of judges and other corrupt court officials.Internal and external supervision is very important to improve court performance and the integrity of corrupt judges and maintain the dignity of the court as a public service.The main task and function of internal supervision is to have the authority to investigate complaints, audit data to proactively identify new problems, recommend improvements and refer criminal matters so that the corruption court supervisory agency which has higher powers is more likely to implement their recommendations regarding the integrity of enforcement.law.
The main duties and functions of external supervision are independent in relation to eradicating violations and enforcing the law.This is because corruption judges tend to have a strong understanding of investigative methodology, allowing them to conceal their activities and resist efforts to improve institutional integrity.For example, abuse of power in obstructing high-profile corruption cases, and calls for more action to be taken to shore up the independence of anti-corruption mechanisms.Therefore, efforts to increase internal and external supervision of corruption judges can be interpreted as a form of internal and external supervision of the integrity of corruption judges in order to strengthen judicial institutions and optimize law enforcement against perpetrators of criminal acts of corruption in Indonesia.
Based on various previous descriptions, it can be interpreted that judge integrity is a judge who has intellectual honesty, places the obligations of his judicial office above his personal interests, obeys the law, is wise in personal relationships, social contacts and other activities as well as in managing finances, is diligent and has a prudent attitude.be careful in carrying out judicial duties.Therefore, the strategy of developing the integrity of corruption crimr judges in Indonesia through the HCM feature is very important.The aim is that the independence and accountability of the justice system can be implemented properly and correctly so that the output of the justice system can protect human rights, facilitate access for everyone, and provide a transparent and objective solution.
Corruption judges based on human capital are a core value in implementing an independent and accountable justice system so that the outcomes of the corruption crime udges' decisions are of high quality and meet justice and legal certainty.
Thus, developing the integrity of corruption crime judges in Indonesia through the HCM feature is also a very strategic agenda at this time.Developing the integrity of corruption crime judges in Indonesia through the HCM feature includes the following agenda:(1).Utilization of integrity assessments in the selection/placement, training and promotion system for corruption judges;(2).Strengthening anti-corruption commitments in all elements within the corruption court environment; (3).Increasing independence and accountability in the implementation and administration of trials and handling of corruption cases;(4).Increasing the effectiveness of supervision and community participation;(5).Strengthening institutions and cooperation mechanisms between law enforcement agencies in the context of optimizing law enforcement against criminal acts of corruption; (6).Developing a culture of zero tolerance towards corruption and legal sanctions for all elements of the apparatus in the working environment of the Corruption Court; and (7).Increasing internal and external supervision of the integrity of Corruption Court judges.

Conclusions
Referring to various descriptions of the previous discussion, it can be concluded that a judge's integrity is a product of the process of instilling values in a person so that these values are part of him and thus become his character.Integrity is also a process, meaning it can rise and fall, it can strengthen or weaken or persist.The integrity of corrupt judges an important role in a judge's process in deciding cases.Judges work in their duties not only involving their intellect but also their integrity.Integrity determines his intellect.The integrity that directs his intellect.Integrity is a dynamic process within a person, so there must be efforts from oneself and externally.Therefore, corruption crime judges are very important in safeguarding state assets through Corruption Court decisions.
The corruption crime judges' decision is a product of the judge's integrity and intellect.If bad integrity is controlling the personality of a corrupt judge, then bad intellect is working on the judge.
Then, there are several challenges to the integrity of Corruption Judges related to the relationship between the corruption court and the protection of state assets: First -The Corruption Court through its decisions punishes perpetrators who harm the state's finances or assets.This law functions as a deterrent effect for perpetrators as well as providing a lesson for others so that they do not dare to commit corruption, Second -is related to the correct law enforcement process in the Corruption Court decision as a form of protection for state assets or state finances.Likewise, if the decision contains a manipulative element because the product's integrity is not good, it can clearly damage state finances.The challenge to the integrity of corruption judges is more serious considering that the case they face involves 2 (two) things that pose a risk to integrity as follows:(1).Corruption perpetrators, most of whom have a high social position and have power or access to the centre of power, namely officials and politicians;and (2).Concerns high-value state finances.Thus, it is hoped that the strategy to develop the integrity of corruption judges in Indonesia can be implemented through the HCM feature which aims to ensure that corruption judges have integrity in order to uphold justice, guarantee freedom, improve social order, resolve disputes, uphold the supremacy of law, provide equal protection, and guarantee the legal process.which is fair.

Figure 1 :
Figure 1: Developing the Integrity of the Corruption Crime Judges: Evidence in Indonesia.(Author's)

Figure 2 :
Figure 2: Strategy to develop the integrity of corruption crime judges in Indonesia through the features of human capital management; Source: Author's Corruption Court judges, Corruption Court ad hoc judges, Deputy Chairmen of the Court, Former criminal administration staff of the Supreme Court's criminal administration section, Chairperson/Judge State Administrative Court (Pengadilan Tata Usaha Negara or PTUN), Head of Sub-Directorate for Cassation and Civil Affairs of the Supreme Court, Registrar and Acting (Pelaksana tugas or Plt) Junior Registrar for Industrial Relations Bandung (Indonesia Corruption Watch, 2017).; ii.In the period 2022 -2023: The Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK) arrested and detained two Supreme Court Judges, Agung Dudrajad Dimyati and Gazalba Saleh in cases of criminal corruption.These two Supreme Court Justices are suspected of being involved in the bribery case in the criminal case of the Intidana Savings and Loans Cooperative at the Supreme Court (Mahkamah Agung or MA), and at the same time the Corruption Eradication Committee (KPK) also arrested nine people who were suspected of being involved in the case that ensnared the two Supreme Court Justices, namely: Elly Tri Pangestu, Judicial Judge/Substitute Registrar for the Supreme Court; Desy Yustria, civil servant (Pegawai Negeri Sipil or PNS) at the Supreme Court Registrar's Office; Muhajir Habibie, civil servant at the Supreme Court Registrar's Office; Redi, Civil Servant MA; and Albasri, PNS MA, Yosep Parera and Eko Suparno, lawyers, and Heryanto Tanaka and Ivan Dwi Kusuma Sujanto are private parties, namely debtors of the Intidana Savings and Loans Cooperative Developing the Integrity of the Corruption Crime Judges: Evidence in Indonesia In Indonesia, the Corruption Crime Court (Pengadilan Tidak Pidana Korupsi or Tipikor) was formed based on Law Number 30 of 2002 concerning the Corruption Crime Eradication Commission (UU No.30/2002) contained in Articles 53 to Article 62. Law No.30/2002 which regulates regarding executive power but within it regulates judicial power).Then, Law No.30/2002 was refined and revised with the issuance of Law Number 19 of 2019 concerning the Corruption Eradication Commission (UU No.19/2019).According to Article 11 (1) of Law No. 10/2019, the Corruption Enforcement Commission (KPK), in carrying out its duties as intended in Article 6 letter e, has the authority to carry out inquiries, investigations and prosecutions of Corruption Crimes which: (a).Involve the authorities law enforcers, State Officials, and other people who are related to Corruption Crimes committed by law The power of judges is realized by the Supreme Court and the judicial bodies subordinate to it, as the administrator of justice (Supreme Court of the Republic of Indonesia, 2023), the Supreme Court carries out the highest supervision over the course of justice in all judicial environments with the aim that trials carried out by the Courts are carried out carefully and reasonable, guided by the principles of simple, fast and low-cost justice, without reducing the Judge's freedom in examining and deciding cases (Article 4 and Article 10 of the Law on Basic Provisions of Power Number 14 of 1970 concerning Basic Provisions of Judicial Power).Tahun 2011 tentang Hak Uji Materiil or PERMA No. 1 of 2011), the right to material review (HUM) is the right possessed by the Supreme Court to assess the content of a statutory regulation.invitations under the Law regarding higher statutory regulations.As the Highest State Court, the Supreme Court is a cassation court whose task is to foster uniformity in the application of the law through cassation decisions and judicial review to ensure that all laws and regulations throughout the territory of the Republic of Indonesia are applied fairly, precisely and correctly.However, not all problems or disputes must be resolved through court, but can also be resolved through arbitration institutions or alternative dispute resolution (Article 58 of Law Number 48 of 2009 concerning Judicial Power).