Corruption is a reality in Indonesia and has a significant impoverishment of wealth state, and damaging the public's trust in the law. As an effort to eradicate corruption, the legislative inaugurated the Corruption Eradication Commission by the Law Number 30 of 2002. The presence of the Corruption Eradication Commission is motivated by the low public trust in law enforcement institutions, namely the Prosecutor and the Police in eradicating corruption. In eradicating corruption, the Corruption Eradication Commission has the authorities of preliminary investigation, full investigation and prosecution, whereas according to Law Number 8 of 1981 concerning Criminal Procedure Code (KUHAP), the authority of preliminary investigation and a full investigation is the authority of the National Police of the Republic of Indonesia, and prosecution is the authority of the Prosecutor of the Republic of Indonesia. Based on this condition, that authority of prosecution corruption case's which the corruption is one of the criminal cases opens the gate to overlapping authority between the Police with Corruption Eradication Commission and the Prosecutor with Corruption Eradication Commission. Then, this paper discusses how the authority of the Corruption Eradication Commission in the prosecution of corruption, whether there is a possibility to overlapping authority between the Corruption Eradication Commission with the other law enforcement agencies by normative juridically that approaching with legal materials and arranged descriptively analytical. These paper findings also conclude with suggestions to strengthen the effort to eradicate corruption in Indonesia, it is necessary to make a system effectively to prevent overlapping between the Corruption Eradication Commission's authority with the other law enforcement agencies, continuing collaboration between law enforcement agencies and increasing law enforcement professionalism.