From Discretion to Corruption: A Normative Study of the Justification and Legitimacy of the Determination of Suspects in the Hajj Quota Corruption Case

Abstract

This normative study examines the transition from legitimate discretionary authority to alleged corruption in Indonesia's Hajj quota allocation, focusing on the 2023–2024 case investigated by the Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK). Employing doctrinal legal research, the analysis scrutinises primary sources, including Law No. 8 of 2019 on the Organisation of Hajj and Umrah and the Anti-Corruption Law (Law No. 31 of 1999 as amended), as well as UNCAC standards and judicial precedents. While Article 9 empowers the Minister of Religious Affairs with flexibility for quota adjustments, Ministerial Decree No. 130/2024's 50:50 distribution of the additional 20,000 slots deviated from Article 64's 92:8 proportionality mandate, potentially enabling undue benefits for private organisers and state losses exceeding IDR 1 trillion. The KPK's January 2026 designation of former Minister Yaqut Cholil Qoumas and aide Ishfah Abidal Aziz as suspects under Article 2, justified by unlawful acts causing enrichment and harm, aligns with evidentiary thresholds yet reveals interpretive tensions between administrative pragmatism and criminal liability. The findings highlight systemic vulnerabilities in oversight mechanisms for discretionary powers in religiously sensitive sectors.