Evidentiary Role of APIP Audit Reports in Village Fund Corruption

Abstract

Corruption of village funds remains a significant problem in Indonesia, largely attributable to weak internal supervision and the limited capacity of the Government Internal Supervision Apparatus (APIP). The enactment of the 2025 Criminal Procedure Code (Law No. 20/2025) marks a fundamental shift from a closed to an open evidentiary system. Concurrently, the material offenses stipulated in Articles 603 and 604 of the 2023 Criminal Code require proof of actual and quantifiable state financial losses. This study examines the legal position and evidentiary strength of the APIP Audit Result Report (LHP) within the corruption evidentiary system under the 2025 Criminal Procedure Code, with particular reference to Corruption Crimes Court Decision Number 18/Pid.Sus-TPK/2025/PN Mam of the Mamuju District Court. This research employs a normative-empirical legal method using a single-case study approach. The findings demonstrate that the APIP LHP constitutes legitimate complementary evidence, supported by the PTPK Law, Constitutional Court Decision No. 31/PUU-X/2012, and SEMA No. 2/2024; however, it does not possess binding evidentiary force over judges. In the Balombong Village case, the court accepted a state financial loss of Rp346,041,702.78 based on the Majene Regency Inspectorate's audit and imposed a sentence twice as severe as the prosecutor's demand. This finding indicates that judicial acceptance of an LHP is determined primarily by the quality, accuracy, and methodological rigor of the audit rather than solely by the institutional status of its issuer. The study concludes that APIP LHPs are essential technical instruments whose probative value depends on compliance with robust audit standards, requiring methodological standardization and greater structural independence of APIP to strengthen corruption eradication.