The Essence of the Principle of Ultimum Remedium Tax Crimes in Indonesia as an Effort to Recover State Losses

Abstract

In Indonesian tax law, the principle summum ius, summa iniuria highlights the conflict between legal certainty and justice. Rooted in Gustav Radbruch’s theory, this principle suggests that law must balance justice (gerechtigkeit), utility (zweckmäßigkeit), and legal certainty (rechtssicherheit), which often leads to conflicting goals. Law No. 28 of 2007 on General Provisions and Procedures for Taxation (UU KUP) aims to provide stability and order in societal regulations. However, the law must remain dynamic to adapt to evolving human and societal needs. UU KUP facilitates flexibility in judicial interpretation by offering a broad framework for tax offenses, as seen in Article 8 regarding tax return obligations. This flexibility helps accommodate various legal scenarios and societal changes. The legal process in Indonesia involves four stages: legal principles (rechtsbeginselen), legal rules (rechtsregels), specific regulations (concrete regels), and jurisprudence (jurisprudentie). These stages reflect how abstract legal principles guide concrete law applications, as described in Article 4 of UU KUP. By using a broad and forward-looking approach, particularly in tax-related criminal acts, UU KUP aims to ensure the law's durability and inclusiveness. The principle of ultimum remidium emphasizes that criminal sanctions should be a last resort for resolving tax issues, as per Article 36 of UU KUP. Understanding these foundational principles is essential for applying tax law effectively, ensuring that legal provisions are both dynamic and just while upholding their core objectives.