在印度尼西亚的法律中并没有关于滥用职权犯罪的一般性定义，即使现行规则反映了该定义的多数内容。据指出，根据法律，滥权必须以力图致富为前提，而这就意味着得到了物质上的好处，而《公约》范围更广，涵盖任何好处，包括非物质性好处。第31/1999 号法律第3 条载有提及犯罪人行为所产生的危害国家财政的后果的内容。对证明给国家造成损失的需要过于关心可能会限制反腐败斗争的进行。
审议人员注意到，对滥用职权可处以无期徒刑，而对贿赂犯罪可处以一到五年的监禁。这一差异可能要求对这些处罚加以重新评估。
Indonesian legislation does not contain a general definition of the abuse of functions offence, even though existing norms reflect most of its definition. It was observed that the law requires that the abuse is made with a view to enrichment, which implies receiving a material advantage, while the Convention is broader and covers any advantages including those of a non-material nature. Article 3 of Law No. 31/1999 contains a reference to the detrimental effect of the perpetrator’s behaviour to the finances of the State. This pre-occupation with the need to show a loss to the State might limit the fight against corruption.
The reviewers noted that abuse of functions is punishable with life imprisonment, while the bribery offence is punishable with between one to five years of imprisonment. This discrepancy may require a reassessment of these penalties.