Legal Limits of Procurement Officials' Liability for State Loss Risks in the HPS No-Chip E-Purchasing System

Abstract

The digitalization of public procurement through the E-Purchasing system under Presidential Regulation Number 46 of 2025 has expanded the discretion of Commitment-Making Officers (PPK), particularly through the exemption of the Estimated Self-Price (HPS) requirement for certain transactions. While this policy is intended to accelerate budget absorption and improve procurement efficiency, it simultaneously increases the legal risks faced by PPKs concerning allegations of state financial losses. This study aims to analyze the legal liability of PPKs in digital procurement and to examine the legal boundaries of determining state financial losses in the absence of HPS. This research employs a normative legal method using statutory, conceptual, and case approaches. The results demonstrate that, in principle, transactions conducted through the government-managed electronic catalog should be assessed based on the presumption of legality and good faith, provided that the PPK acts within the scope of authority and applicable procedures. Consequently, price discrepancies arising from weaknesses in the supervision or management of the electronic procurement system cannot automatically be attributed as personal liability of the PPK. Furthermore, following Constitutional Court Decision Number 25/PUU-XIV/2016, the determination of state financial losses must be based on actual loss rather than potential loss and should first be examined through administrative accountability mechanisms before criminal law enforcement is pursued. Therefore, personal liability may only be imposed upon the PPK where there is evidence of abuse of authority, malicious intent (mens rea), or gross negligence (culpa lata).