COMMITMENT MAKINGOFFICIAL (PPK) IN PROCUREMENT OF

GOVERNMENT GOODS / SERVICES

RAISSA ARDELIA
raissaardelia@ymail.com
Magister Kenotariatan
Fakultas Hukum Universitas Airlangga

NAONY FENTI ISTIQLALLIA

fnaony@gmail.com
Magister Kenotariatan
Fakultas Hukum Universitas Airlangga

PRAMUDYA RAMADHANTI
pramudyaramadhanti@yahoo.com
Magister Kenotariatan
Fakultas Hukum Universitas Airlangga

ABSTRACT

Legal obscurity of Commitment Maker Officials (PPK’s position in the procurement

of government goods / services related to legal responsibilities in the event of deviation in the
procurement of government goods / services, which creates a sense of injustice based on
Presidential Regulation Number 16 Year 2018 about Procurement of Government Goods /
Services, It appears that in the process of procurement of goods / services not only the PPK is
involved, but there are other parties who take part in the procurement of goods / services that
are interrelated with each other, including Budget Users (PA) and Budget Attorney ( KPA).
The formulation of the legal issues in this study are: (1) the position of the
Commitment Making Officials (PPK) in the contract for procurement of government goods /
services; (2) personal or occupation responsibility in the Commitment Making Officials
(PPK); (3) the limit of corruption responsibility of the Commitment Making Officials (PPK).
This research is normative research, namely a technique or procedure of study based on
several legal principles, legal rules, and legal norms relating to the substance of general and
specific laws in order to be able to answer the proposed legal issues.
The results of this study are expected to have conceptual and legal reform of the legal
position of the Commitment Making Officials (PPK) in the procurement of government goods
/ services. So that it can be a legal basis for law enforcement officials to determine the extent
to which the legal responsibility of the Commitment Making Officials (PPK) in the existance
of deviation in the procurement of government goods / services.

Keywords: Criminal Responsibility, Committing Officer (PPK), Deviations Procurement of

Government Goods / Services.
A. INTRODUCTION

1. Background to the Problems

Many deviations that occur in the Government's procurement of goods / services often

occur due to the actions of procurement officers and other relevant officers who abuse the

authority possessed by these officers. These deviations cause losses to state finances, this

is because remembering that the source of government procurement of goods and services

comes from state finances listed in the APBN / APBD, so that this meets the elements

contained in the corruption offense. When reviewing in terms of accountability, in practice

in the field, accountability for irregularities in the process of procurement of Government

goods and services is fully delegated to Commitment Making Officials or PPK, this is

implied in the provisions of the Presidential Regulation concerning Procurement of Goods

/ Services.

This raises a sense of injustice, given that based on Presidential Regulation Number

16 Year 2018 concerning Government Procurement of Goods / Services, it appears that

the process of procurement of goods / services is not only the PPK involved, but there are

other parties who take part in procurement. goods and services that are related to each

other, including Budget Users and Budget User Proxies. Where PA has the duty and

authority to implement the Procurement General Plan while KPA has the authority in

accordance with what is delegated by the PA regarding the procurement of Government

goods and services.

There are several examples of decisions related to criminal acts of corruption in the

procurement of goods / services that involve Commitment Makers (PPK) as perpetrators

of crimes, as follows:
 1. First, Decision No. 457 K / Pid.Sus / 2012, Defendant on behalf of Ir. Edy

Karyoso, MM as PPK for the procurement of road improvement work for the

Jekerto district of Grobongan Regency FY 2008.

2. Second, Decision No. 1287 K / Pid.Sus / 2013, Defendant on behalf of Prof.

Dr. H. Abdus Salam, Dz, MM. as PPK for the procurement of communication

and information technology tools in IAAN Sheikh Nurjati Cirebon.

3. Third, Decision No. 2543 K / Pid.Sus / 2013, Defendant on behalf of Sutanto,

S.T., M.T. as PPK to procure the normalization work of the Gawe River

located in 4 villages, namely Pekunden Village, Kedunggede Village, Kejawar

Village and Sudagaran Village, Banyumas District, Banyumas Regency.

4. Fourth, Decision No. 99 / Pid.Sus / TPK / 2014 / PN.Sby, Defendant on behalf

of Agus Kuncoro, S.Sos. as PPK for the East Java Regional Office of DJBC

Kanwil building project (continued) Suarabaya TA 2012 is located on Jalan

Raya Juanda Km. 3-4 Semambung District of Gedang, Regency of Sidoarjo.

Some examples above indicate that almost all cases of corruption in Government

Procurement are based on normative approaches. The degree of depth in discovery of

guilt and its correlation with intent is based on the knowledge and willtheory. Supposedly,

law enforcement officers go deeper about the level of guilties perpetrators, whether the

perpetrators commits by his own will or not (deliberate deliberation on autonomous

awareness). Where in the Government Procurement not only the Commitment Officials

(PPK) alone who carry out the procurement.

2. Problem Formulation

Based on the description above, a problem statement can be drawn as follows:

1. Position of Commitment Making Officer (PPK) in government goods / services

procurement contract.

2. Personal responsibility or position in the Pejabat Pembuat Komitmen (PPK).

3. Research Methods

Based on the object of research which is a positive law, the method that will be

used is normative juridical, namely reviewing the legal rules governing the legal

responsibility of the Commitment Making Officer (PPK) in the procurement of

government goods / services. As a scientific research, a series of research activities

ranging from collecting legal materials to analyzing legal materials is carried out by

observing the rules of scientific research. This research is descriptive analytical, so

Page4of 20
that in this study not only intended to describe the symptoms or legal phenomena

relating to the application of laws and regulations that contain legal liability in the

procurement of government goods / services, will but it is more intended to analyze

the phenomena of these laws and then describe them systematically in accordance

with the rules of writing.

This study uses normative research with a statutory approach (case approach),

case approach (case approach) and conceptual approach (conceptual approach)1. In

order to be more focused and in-depth, the scope of this research is limited to the

legal responsibility of the Commitment Making Officer (PPK) in the procurement of

government goods / services. This is based on a fact that has occurred in the legal

1Peter Mahmud Marzuki, Penelitian Hukum, (Kencana 2005). [ 93].

practice of government procurement of goods / services, where there are many

procurement irregularities that can cause some losses.

B. DISCUSSION

The position of the Commitment Officials (PPK) in the Government Procurement

under Article 1 number 10 of the Presidential Decree on the Government Procurement,

the Commitment Officials (PPK), hereinafter referred to as the PPKis an officer

authorized by the PA / KPA to decide and / which conduct action in the expenditure of

state budget / regional budget.The problems that occur in the Government Procurement

process, frequently exist due to the actions of procurement officials and other relevant

officials who abuse the authority owned by him/her. Such deviations cause losses to the

state's finances, this is because given that the source of Government Procurement is

derived from the state finances contained in the APBN / APBD, so this fulfills the

elements contained in the corruption. If we observe in case of responsibility, in

practice, the responsibility for deviations of Government Procurement’s process is

entirely be imposed to the Commitment Officials (PPK), as regulated under

Presidential Regulation on Government Procurement.

The Procurement of Goods / Services by the Government has a long history since

the enactment of a special regulation on Government Goods / Services Procurement in

2003. Initially, Procurement activities were regulated in Presidential Decree number

80 of 2003 concerning Guidelines for the Implementation of Government Goods /

Services Procurement. There are several important things that are regulated in the

Presidential Decree which include procurement of goods / services whose financing is

partly or wholly charged to the APBN / APBD, procurement of goods / services which

are partly or wholly financed from foreign loans / grants (PHLN) and procurement of

goods / services for investment in the BI, BHMN, BUMN, BUMD, whose financing is

partly or wholly charged to the APBN / APBD. Unlike the legal instruments thereafter,

this Presidential Decree does not explicitly regulate the existence of KDP in a
Procurement process. However, the authority and function have been accommodated by

the head of the office / work unit as stipulated in Article 1 point 4 of this Presidential

Decree. Despite having a different nomenclature for people who are directly

responsible, the function of the head of the office / work unit is similar to that of PPK,

namely the departmental / agency structural officer responsible for the procurement of

goods / services financed from routine APBN budgetary funds.

Presidential Regulation No. 16 of 2018 issued on March 22, 2018 regulates many

things about Goods / Services Procurement policies. This is intended to perfect

Presidential Decree number 80 of 2003 which according to the author contains several

things including the existence of legal subjects in the process of procurement of goods /

services themselves. In this Perpres there are several subjects including PPK,

Government, K / L / D / I (Ministry / Institutions / Regional Work Units / Other

Institutions), LKPP, PA, KPA, and so on. In addition, this Perpres has also experienced

several changes which means continuous improvement is being made to realize the

Procurement of Goods / Services process.

In the Government Procurement of Goods / Services there are a number of

parties who play a role both directly and indirectly involved, including PA / KPA, PPK,

Procurement Officials and Work Receiving Officers. One party that holds a

fundamental role is the Commitment Making Officer or commonly known as PPK.

Based on Article 1 point 10 of the Government Regulation on Procurement of Goods /

Services, the Commitment Making Officer, hereinafter referred to as PPK, is an official

authorized by PA / KPA to make decisions and / or take actions that can result in state /

regional budget expenditures. Juridically, the PPK has several main tasks and

authorities mandated by the Law, as follows:

a. compile procurement planning;

 b. establish technical specifications / Terms of Reference (KAK);

c. establish contract design;

d. set HPS;

e. determine the amount of down payment to be paid to the Provider;

f. propose changes to the schedule of activities;

g. assign support teams;

h. assign teams or experts;

i. implement E-purchasing for a value of at least above Rp 200,000,000.00

(two hundred million rupiah);

j. establish a Letter of Appointment for Goods / Services Providers;

k. controlling the Contract;

l. report the implementation and completion of activities to PA / KPA;

m. submit results of the implementation of activities to PA / KPA with minutes of

submission;

n. keep and maintain the integrity of all documents for carrying out activities;

o. assess the performance of the Provider.

In addition to carrying out the tasks referred to above, PPK carries out the

assignment of authority from PA / KPA, including: taking actions that result in

expenditure expenditure and establishing and establishing agreements with other

parties within the stipulated budget limits. PPK in carrying out its duties can be

assisted by the Procurement of Goods / Services Manager.

Preparation of Procurement of Goods / Services through Providers by PPK

includes activities:

a. set HPS;

b. establish contract design;

 c. establish technical specifications / KAK;

d. determine the down payment, down payment guarantee, implementation

guarantee, maintenance guarantee, warranty certificate, and / or price

adjustment.

PPK is prohibited from entering into an agreement or signing a contract with the

Provider, in the event that the budget is not yet available or there is not enough

available budget that can result in exceeding the available budgetary budget for

activities funded by the APBN / APBD. In the event that there is a difference between

the field conditions at the time of implementation and the drawings and / or technical

specifications / KAK specified in the Contract document, the CO with the Provider may

make changes to the contract, which includes:

a. increase or decrease the volume stated in the Contract;

b. add and / or reduce the type of activity;

c. change technical specifications according to field conditions;

d. change the implementation schedule.

Changes to contracts that result in the addition of the contract value are carried

out provided that the final contract value does not exceed 10% (ten percent) of the price

stated in the initial contract. Whereas, if the Provider fails to complete the work until

the period of execution of the Contract ends, but the PPK assesses that the Provider is

able to complete the work, PPK provides the opportunity for the Provider to complete

the work. Providing an opportunity to the Provider to complete the work contained in

the contract addendum which regulates the time of completion of the work, the

imposition of penalties for late penalties to the Provider and the extension of the

Guaranteed Implementation. Giving opportunities to complete work can exceed the

Budget Year. After the work is completed 100% (one hundred percent) in accordance
with the provisions contained in the Contract, the Provider submits a request in writing

to PPK to hand over the goods / services. PPK checks the goods / services delivered.

PPK and the Provider sign the Minutes of Handover. PPK submits goods / services to

PA / KPA, then PA / KPA requests PjPHP / PPHP to carry out administrative checks

on goods / services to be handed over and stated in the Minutes. The involvement of

KDP in procurement before the auction is drafted a contract. Whereas after the

determination of the Provider is to sign the contract and the management of the

contract, after the contract is complete, the payment of the contract and delivery as the

state / regional property assets is completed.

The existence of PPK in a Goods / Services Procurement does not appear

suddenly or indeed exists because the position in an institutional structure is in a

Government agency. However, PPK is the person chosen by his superior who in this

case is PA / KPA. This is strictly regulated in the Presidential Regulation on

Government Procurement of Goods / Services. The sound of this provision is, "PPK is

an official determined by PA / KPA to carry out the procurement of goods / services".

So the existence of PPK is to carry out the procurement of goods / services only, not

intended to carry out activities other than this and usually if all matters concerning the

procurement of goods / services have been completed, he is released as long as there

are no violations or deviations from applicable law. The person who can be appointed

as a PPK is not an arbitrary person especially when he or she is appointed without

consideration, but it must be the person who is in accordance with the task at hand.

Therefore, someone who can be appointed as a PPK must have his own criteria. So that

there are minimum requirements so that one can carry out several functions as we year
involve state money. For this reason, KDP positions and positions cannot be forced

because it is indeed a liability that is quite risky.2

The role of KDP after the contract is signed with the provider is to manage the

contract so that the contract can achieve its objectives. Often we ignore the contract,

because later there will be a solution if the work until the time period of the contract

has not reached the target, there can still be consideration for the extension of work

completion time. We should think as if there is no time for an extension of time. KDP,

which is an important organ in the Procurement process, does not only work hard

during the pre-contract period, because it is also required to maintain the stability of

the procurement process. This is intended because a government project is for the

benefit of the people whose benefits will be enjoyed by the people in addition to the

source of funding coming from State money. In maintaining the stability of work during

Procurement, PPK can do several jobs after the contract is signed, which includes:

1) Identify the objectives of the contract that can be seen in the contract or

specifications, drawings and other documents made by the consultant

planner or experts.

2) Create a team for administration of contract implementation and supervision

of contracts.

3) Create a job control tool, often called the S curve (regarding the S curve,

please study or disearch from the internet) or make controls for example in a

simple form.

PPK which has a very complex task is actually government officials in general

who also have a constant role in a particular agency. This means that the Procurement

process is not the only job that PPK handles so it requires a supported team that can

2Mudjisantoso, Memahami Kontrak Pengadaan Pemerintah Indonesia, (Primaprint, 2014) [2].

back up its functions. Supported team intended to help PPK in carrying out its duties is

the Procurement of Goods / Services Manager. Goods / Services Procurement Contract,

hereinafter referred to as a Contract, is a written agreement between PPK and a Goods

/ Services Provider or a Self-management contractor In carrying out construction work

contracts, KDP can be assisted by employees acting as field directors or technical

directors. The field director is a support team formed / determined by the PPK,

consisting of 1 (one) person or more, which is determined in the specific terms of the

contract to control the execution of the work. While the technical director is a support

team appointed / determined by the PPK to oversee the implementation of the work. In

KDP does not have competence in technical aspects, for example in construction work

it can form a technical team. The technical team for construction works can come from

the Public Works / Ministry of Public Works Department or experts from the College of

Engineering College. As explained above, the existence of PPK is not permanent

because PPK is an organ that is formed for the interests of a particular Government

institution in the process of Procurement of Goods / Services. It is not permanent, here

it is temporary, which starts from a determination by PA / KPA. This Determination

Activity is not clearly stipulated in the Perpres regarding what media is used by PA /

KPA. However, basically Determination is often done by issuing a letter containing the

name of the PPK along with the signature of the issuing party, namely PA / KPA.

Regarding KDP involvement in the procurement contract, as we know that KDP

is the party directly involved in signing the contract. The legal consequences for the

parties involved in the contract as stipulated in Article 1338 of the Civil Code and also

the Principle of Pacta Sunt Servanda, namely the implementation of the agreement are

the same as the law for his party. Therefore, it is important to understand the types and
forms of contracts that will be made by the parties. In preparing the draft Procurement

of Goods / Services Contract, PPK can be assisted by the Procurement Manager.

According to Ridwan, the responsibility of the position is related to the legality

(validity) of government actions, namely in relation to the use of government authority.

officials as functionaries of positions can be subject to personal liability, whether

criminal or civil, if he does maladministration.

According to Jimly Asshiddiqie, the concept of accountability is twofold, namely

personal or personal responsibility and institutional responsibility or position. He

further stated that if an official in carrying out his duties and authority is in accordance

with the applicable legal norms or regulations, then his actions are accounted for as a

position or institutional responsibility, but otherwise if an official carries out his duties

and authority violates the applicable legal norms or rules then the implementation of

these actions is personally responsible or personal responsibility.3

Philipus M. Hadjon, states that the responsibilities of officials in carrying out

their functions are distinguished between job responsibilities and personal

responsibility. Responsibility for the position with regard to the legality (validity) of

government actions. In administrative law, the issue of the legality of the act of

government is related to the approach to government power. Personal responsibility

relates to functionary approaches or behavioral approaches in administrative law.

Personal responsibility regarding maladministration in the use of authority and public

service. The distinction between office responsibility and personal responsibility for

government action brings consequences relating to criminal responsibility, civil

liability and state administrative accountability (TUN). The reason for TUN

accountability is accountability because "the source of authority is related to an office

3Jimly Asshiddiqie, Islam dan Tradisi Negara Konstitusi, Seminar Indonesia-Malaysia, (UIN/IAIN 2010). [12-13].
 (ambty)", so without any position there will be no authority. In relation to the sanctions

imposed it certainly has to do with the consequences of using unlawful authority.

Criminal responsibility is personal responsibility in relation to the act of government,

personal responsibility of an official associated with maladministration. Civil liability

can be the responsibility of the office relating to illegal acts by the authorities. Civil

liability is a personal responsibility if there is an element of maladministration. TUN

accountability is basically responsibility for office.4

The position of the Commitment Making Officer (PPK) in the Government

Procurement of Goods / Services based on Article 1 point 10 of the Government Goods

/ Services Procurement Regulation, Commitment Making Officer, hereinafter referred

to as PPK, is an official authorized by PA / KPA to make decisions and / or take action

which can result in state / regional budget expenditures

The problems that occur in the Government procurement of goods / services

often occur due to the actions of procurement officials and other relevant officials

who abuse the authority possessed by these officials. These deviations cause losses to

state finances, this is because remembering that the source of government

procurement of goods and services comes from state finances listed in the APBN /

APBD, so that this meets the elements contained in the corruption offense. When

reviewing in terms of accountability, in practice in the field, accountability for

irregularities in the process of procurement of Government goods and services is fully

delegated to Commitment Making Officials or PPK, this is implied in the provisions of

the Presidential Regulation concerning Procurement of Goods / Services.

This raises a sense of injustice, given that based on Presidential Regulation

Number 16 Year 2018 on Government Procurement of Goods / Services, it appears

4Philipus M Hadjon dkk, Hukum Administrasi dan Tindak Pidana Korupsi, (Gadjah Mada University Press 2011).

[16], baca juga Philipus M. Hadjon, RUU Administrasi Pemerintah Sebagai Kodifikasi (sebagian) Hukum Administrasi
Umum (legal rules of Administrative law) dan Peradilan Tata Usaha Negara, Gema Peratun Tahun XVI No. (2009) [9].
that in the process of procurement of goods / services not only the PPK is involved,

but there are other parties who take part in procurement of goods and services that

are related to each other, including Budget Users and Budget User Proxies. Where

PA has the duty and authority to implement the Procurement General Plan while KPA

has the authority in accordance with what is delegated by the PA regarding the

procurement of Government goods and services.

The findings offered to become ius constituendum (the aspired law) in this study

are the legal position of the Commitment Making Officer (PPK) in the Procurement of

Government Goods / Services as an official who receives delegation of authority from

the Budget User (PA) / Budget User Proxy (KPA ) as the boss to take decisions and /

or take actions that can result in expenditure of the state / regional budget. This is

called novelty, which will later become the legal basis of law enforcement officials to

determine the extent to which the legal responsibility of the Commitment Makers

(PPK) in the occurrence of irregularities in the procurement of government goods /

services.

The legal position of the Commitment Making Officer (PPK) as a benchmark /

reference for legal accountability in determining how many PPK can be requested is

criminal responsibility in the matter of irregularities in the procurement of

government goods / services. This novelty is as transparent and relevant to the

principle of justice based on Article 6 of the Presidential Regulation Number 16 of

2018 concerning Government Procurement of Goods / Services. Thus, it raises a

sense of justice, given that based on Presidential Regulation Number 16 of 2018

concerning Government Procurement of Goods / Services, it appears that in the

process of procurement of goods / services not only the PPK is involved, but there are
other parties who take part in procurement of goods and services that are interrelated

with each other.

C. CLOSING

1. Conclusion

The position of the Commitment Making Official (PPK) in the contract of

procurement of goods / services of the government begins from setting the draft

contract, controlling the Contract and settlement of the Contract. So the Commitment

Making Official requires a lot of understanding and / or ability in government

procurement contracts, where the procurement of goods and services at one agency

depends on the Commitment Generating Officer (PPK), therefore in its

implementation demands a skill and the accuracy and responsibilities that differ from

the other principal duties of the other procurement officials and in the event of an

error in the execution which would cause a state loss which would result in claims of

compensation or other charges.

The Personal Responsibility of the Commitment Generating Officer (PPK) in the

procurement of government goods / services is a personal responsibility arising out of

the KDP maladministration action in the exercise of authority as an executor and the

maladministration act creates criminal responsibility. While the responsibility of the

Commitment Maker Office (PPK) in the procurement of government goods / services

is the responsibility of validity (legality) of the use of authority in the procurement by

the CO that relies on authority, procedures and substance. The responsibilities of the

post bear the responsibility of the government / state.

2. Suggestions

It is necessary to incorporate the concept of Commitment Maker Office (KDP)

clearly and explicitly into the revision of Presidential Regulation Number 16 of 2018

on Procurement of Goods / Services of the Government, where the position of

Commitment Generating Officer (PPK) as subordinate from Budget User (PA) Budget

(KPA).

It is necessary to have a better arrangement regarding the procurement of

government goods / services, which is not only regulated in the form of Presidential

Regulation, but it is necessary to be regulated in the form of specific Laws on the

procurement of government goods / services, therefore there should be drafted the bill

on the procurement.
REFERENCES

Books :
Peter Mahmud Marzuki, Penelitian Hukum, (Kencana 2005).
Mudjisantoso, Memahami Kontrak Pengadaan Pemerintah Indonesia, (Primaprint 2014).
Soerjono Soekanto dan Purnadi Purbacaraka, Aneka Cara Pembedaan Hukum, (Citra Aditya
Bhakti 1994).

Paper :

Jimly Asshiddiqie, Islam dan Tradisi Negara Konstitusi, Seminar Indonesia-Malaysia,

(UIN/IAIN 2010).

Philipus M. Hadjon, dkk, Hukum Administrasi dan Tindak Pidana Korupsi (Gadjah Mada
University Press 2011)

Philipus M. Hadjon, RUU Administrasi Pemerintah Sebagai Kodifikasi (sebagian) Hukum

Administrasi Umum (legal rules of Administrative law) dan Peradilan Tata Usaha
Negara, (Gema Peratun Tahun XVI No. 21 2009).