Budi Suhariyanto, Cecep Mustafa, Topo Santoso
This article compares corporate liability in transnational corruption cases between Indonesia and the United States. This article uses a statutory, case, conceptual, and comparative approach to document study to analyse what aspects of the arrangement and practical experience in the United States could be emulated and considered for application in Indonesia. This article concludes that Indonesia's anti-corruption laws are unclear and incomplete in regulating the accountability of transnational corruption-perpetrators so that prosecution of foreign corporations faces obstacles. US International Corrupt Practices Act United States (FCPA) has criminalised foreign corporations either as a holding or branch that has a working relationship with the corporation or someone involved in corruption in their country so that law enforcers and courts have the authority to prosecute accountability and decide on their conviction. In amending the anti-corruption law in Indonesia, it is necessary to criminalise corporate subjects that are holding company or associated with them abroad, which are involved in corruption both detrimental to state finances and in the private sector. Besides, for the effectiveness of cross-jurisdictional law enforcement authorities, it is also necessary to ratify the OECD and the United States so that the prosecution of corporate criminal liability involved in transnational corruption that occurs within and/or is related to Indonesia's interests can be sentenced by the Indonesian Court.