Reformation took place since 1998, but the eradication of corruption
was still being not yet maximal, many corruption case which not yet been
revealed. one of its cause is the difficulty for proving by using KUHAP system,
so that reversed burden of proof represent one of the way for effectively fight
against corruption. The initial problem lies in how the implementation from
reserved burden of proof to resolved corruption crime (gratification).
Therefore the purpose of this research is to know how applying reversed
burden of proof in corruption crime (gratification). The method applied within
this research is the study of normative law, focusing on norm and using
secondary data as primary data, that is primary sources of law, namely
legislation correlated with the research, and secondary sources of law namely
legal opinion, research results, and literatures correlated with the research.
The result of this research is the effectiveness of implementation reversed
burden of proof really depended on the public prosecutor's capacity in
gathering beginning evidences of at least 2 legal evidences, where this
evidence filled elements in the accusation letter and if the proven defendant
was guilty then the judge in deciding also must relate in the provisions of the
article 183 KUHAP. Therefore the writer of this research suggest, in purpose
to make implementation of revesed burden of proof effective, the public
prosecutor in making the accusation letter only used the form primair-subsider
not the alternative or cumulative, if the primary accusation was unproven, the
defendant could be still being snared with the accusation subsider that took
the form of another passive bribes.