The act of conspiracy in the criminal act of corruption in Indonesia is very difficult to prove because the standard definition and elements of criminal conspiracy in cases of corruption are different from the definition of Conspiracy in other crimes. This situation is getting more complicated because the elements and definitions of the standard of conspiracy in corruption cases are not clearly regulated. This encourages the author to conduct a study on the subject matter of what are the weaknesses of the law in the case of criminal conspiracy in the criminal act of corruption to then carry out the reconstruction of the Conspiracy in criminal acts of corruption based on progressive law. The paradigm in this research is constructivism and the type of research used is descriptive-analytical. Based on the research conducted, it is found that the implementation of law enforcement in cases of conspiracy related to corruption in Indonesia is not yet fair, this is due to the unclear elements in the criminal Conspiracy in cases of corruption. The weaknesses that result in this are weaknesses in the form of overlapping rules, law enforcement which only prioritizes proof in the form of real losses and ignores the meetings of mind, the influence of power, and politics. So it is necessary to reconstruct Article 2 by adding the phrase "can" and Article 15 of Law Number 31 of the Year 1999 Jo. Law Number 20 Year 2001 Concerning the Eradication of Corruption Crime.