Neurolaw and moral competence of corruption offenders: A criminal law analysis

Zico Junius Fernando

doi:10.32697/integritas.v12i1.1553

ARTIKEL PENELITIAN Edisi: Vol 12 No 1 (2026) | Rilis: 2026-06-24

Neurolaw and moral competence of corruption offenders: A criminal law analysis

Zico Junius Fernando¹

¹ Universitas Bengkulu

DOI: https://doi.org/10.32697/integritas.v12i1.1553

BACA / PREVIEW FULLTEXT PDF (INGGRIS) UNDUH FULLTEXT PDF (INGGRIS)

Unduhan

222

Tampilan

190

Sitasi

26

ABSTRAK

This article examines the relevance and limits of neurolaw in assessing the moral competence of corruption offenders within criminal law. The study responds to the growing use of neuroscience in criminal justice while recognizing that corruption remains a deliberate abuse of entrusted power that must not be excused through biological reductionism. Using normative legal research with statutory, conceptual, and comparative approaches, this article analyzes the relationship between mens rea, moral competence, neurocognitive impairment, and proportional criminal responsibility. The study finds that neurolaw may assist courts in understanding exceptional cases involving serious impairment of impulse control, moral reasoning, or executive function, but it should not be treated as a general defense for corruption. In an Indonesian context, its use must be limited, carefully regulated, and supported by strict evidentiary safeguards, independent forensic assessment, judicial gatekeeping, and protection against elite impunity. The article argues that neurolaw is relevant not to weaken anti-corruption enforcement, but to refine the assessment of culpability in rare and scientifically verifiable circumstances. Therefore, neuroscience-based evidence should complement, not replace, legal proof of intent, accountability, and public trust protection.

KATA KUNCI

Neurolaw Corruption Offenders Moral Competence Criminal Responsibility Neuroscience and Law

TIM PENULIS & BIOGRAFI PENULIS

Zico Junius Fernando

, Universitas Bengkulu

Faculty of Law, Universitas Bengkulu, Bengkulu, Indonesia

DAFTAR PUSTAKA (REFERENCES)

A Vincent, N. (2014). Neurolaw and direct brain interventions. Criminal Law and Philosophy, 8(1), 43–50. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11572-012-9164-y Akhmad, A., Fernando, Z. J., & Teeraphan, P. (2023). Unmasking illicit enrichment: A comparative analysis of wealth acquisition under Indonesian, Thailand and Islamic Law. Journal of Indonesian Legal Studies, 8(2), 899–934. https://doi.org/10.15294/jils.v8i2.69332 Aono, D., Yaffe, G., & Kober, H. (2019). Neuroscientific evidence in the courtroom: A Review. Cognitive Research: Principles and Implications, 4(1), 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1186/S41235-019-0179-Y/TABLES/1 Belcher, A., & Sinnott-Armstrong, W. (2010). Neurolaw. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Cognitive Science, 1(1), 18–22. https://doi.org/10.1002/WCS.8 Brown, E. (2019). The brain, the criminal and the courts. Knowable Magazine. https://knowablemagazine.org/article/mind/2019/neuroscience-criminal-justice Cardoso, R. C. (2021). Neurolaw and the neuroscience of free will: an overview. SCIO: Revista de Filosofía, 21, 55–81. https://doi.org/10.46583/SCIO_2021.21.843 Clem, M. (2024). A - 144 catfishing, financial fraud and neuropsychological mitigation. Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology, 39(7), 1086–1086. https://doi.org/10.1093/ARCLIN/ACAE067.158 da Rocha, A. F. (2013). Toward a better understanding of the relationship between neurosciences and law. SSRN Electronic Journal, 1–22. https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.2313182 Dash, S. S., Padhi, H. C., & Das, B. (2020). Neurolaw: A new horizon of neuroscience and law (pp. 1–8). https://papers.ssrn.com/abstract=4433460 Effendi, E., Fernando, Z. J., Anditya, A. W., & Chandra, M. J. A. (2023). Trading in influence (Indonesia): A critical study. Cogent Social Sciences, 9(1), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1080/23311886.2023.2231621 Fagan, T. K. (2022). Neuroscience and the concept of culpability. Encyclopedia of Behavioral Neuroscience: Volumes 1-3, Second Edition, 1–3, 713–718. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-809324-5.24107-2 Fuss, J., Dressing, H., & Briken, P. (2015). Neurogenetic evidence in the courtroom: A randomised controlled trial with German Judges. Journal of Medical Genetics, 52(11), 730–737. https://doi.org/10.1136/JMEDGENET-2015-103284 Hu, Y., Hu, C., Derrington, E., Corgnet, B., Qu, C., & Dreher, J. C. (2021). Neural basis of corruption in power-holders. ELife, 10, 1–7. https://doi.org/10.7554/ELIFE.63922 Jurjako, M., & Malatesti, L. (2018). Neuropsychology and the criminal responsibility of psychopaths: reconsidering the evidence. Erkenntnis, 83(5), 1003–1025. https://doi.org/10.1007/S10670-017-9924-0 Karianga, H., & Fernando, Z. J. (2024). The damage of the shadow economy: The urgency of addressing foreign bribery in Indonesia. Pakistan Journal of Criminology, 16(2), 783–796. https://doi.org/10.62271/PJC.16.2.783.796 Khalid, Z., Lee, R., & Wall, B. W. (2024). The use of neurobiological evidence in sentencing mitigation. Behavioral Sciences & the Law, 42(2), 65–78. https://doi.org/10.1002/BSL.2645 Langleben, D. D., & Moriarty, J. C. (2013). Using brain imaging for lie detection: where science, law, and policy collide. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 19(2), 222–234. https://doi.org/10.1037/A0028841 Maoz, U., & Yaffe, G. (2016). What does recent neuroscience tell us about criminal responsibility? Journal of Law and the Biosciences, 3(1), 120–139. https://doi.org/10.1093/JLB/LSV051 Mourão, L. (2018). Neuroscience: A new model for anticorruption policies? SSRN Electronic Journal, 1–20. https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.3103099 O’Sullivan, O. P. (2022). Book review: The brain defense: murder in Manhattan and the dawn of neuroscience in America’s courtrooms. The Journal of Forensic Practice, 24(1), 79–80. https://doi.org/10.1108/jfp-01-2022-058 Prescott, S. L. ;, Holton, K. F. ;, Lowry, C. A. ;, Nicholson, J. J. ;, Logan, A. C., Prescott, S. L., Holton, K. F., Lowry, C. A., Nicholson, J. J., & Logan, A. C. (2024). The intersection of ultra-processed foods, neuropsychiatric disorders, and neurolaw: implications for criminal justice. NeuroSci 2024, Vol. 5, Pages 354-377, 5(3), 354–377. https://doi.org/10.3390/NEUROSCI5030028 Scarpazza, C., Pellegrini, S., Pietrini, P., & Sartori, G. (2018). The role of neuroscience in the evaluation of mental insanity: on the controversies in Italy. Neuroethics, 11(1), 83–95. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12152-017-9349-0 Slamkov, G., Stamevski, V., & Stamevska, E. (2021). The concept of “White - Collar” crime. International Scientific Journal Vision, 6(2), 113–124. https://visionjournal.edu.mk/social/index.php/1/article/view/103 Smith, A. C. (2009). Daubert v. Merrell Dow pharmaceuticals. Wiley Encyclopedia of Forensic Science, 1–6. https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470061589.FSA008 Yen, C., Lin, C. L., & Chiang, M. C. (2023). Exploring the frontiers of neuroimaging: a review of recent advances in understanding brain functioning and disorders. Life, 13(7), 1–27. https://doi.org/10.3390/LIFE13071472 Yoder, K. J., & Decety, J. (2018). The neuroscience of morality and social decision-making. Psychology, Crime & Law, 24(3), 279–295. https://doi.org/10.1080/1068316X.2017.1414817

LISENSI DAN HAK CIPTA

Lisensi Terbuka Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License (CC BY-SA 4.0)

Karya jurnal ini dipublikasikan secara terbuka untuk publik dan dilindungi di bawah lisensi Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

CARA MENGUTIP (HOW TO CITE)

Fernando, Z. J. (2026). Neurolaw and moral competence of corruption offenders: A criminal law analysis. Integritas: Jurnal Antikorupsi, 12(1), 29-42. https://doi.org/10.32697/integritas.v12i1.1553