Ada Pertanyaan? Hubungi Kami 
Ada Pertanyaan? Hubungi Kami Abdul Razak Asri, Mahinda Arkyasa
One of the main issues that Indonesian law enforcers continue to face concerns corruption suspects that attempt to escape overseas. This is because when a suspect has escaped, law enforcers lose not only the chance to apprehend the person, but also the chance to recover corruption assets.
However, Muhammad Yusuf, Head of the Indonesian Financial Transaction Reports and Analysis Center (PPATK), explained that even if the suspect has escaped, law enforcers still can recover corruption assets without a lawsuit. This mechanism, as Yusuf explained, is a measure called “non-conviction based asset forfeiture” (NCB).
NCB is a procedure that does not require a conviction (civil or criminal) against an individual in order to confiscate his/her assets. Instead, prosecutors must only prove that the property in question was involved in an illegal activity.
In his dissertation titled ‘Non-Conviction Based Asset Forfeiture: A Solution to Eradicate Corruption in Indonesia’, Yusuf confirmed that NCB is an effective solution for law enforcers who are having difficulties in recovering corruption assets.
“NCB is effective in confiscating corruption assets from suspects who have passed away, suffer from terminal illness, have escaped, or cannot be found,” he explained when defending his doctoral dissertation at Universitas Padjadjaran, in Bandung, Monday (10/12).
Komariah Emong Sapardjaja, member of the dissertation committee, questioned the possibility of abuse of power by law enforcers if NBC is implemented.
“Without a lawsuit, I am worried that law enforcers will act deliberately in confiscating a person’s assets,” Komariah stated.
She argued that asset recovery has been stipulated under Article 32 of Law No. 31 of 1999 on Corruption Eradication, which states that a prosecutor may file a civil lawsuit against corruption suspects.
“State attorneys must be empowered to file a civil lawsuit against corruption suspects. So far, I cannot recall any civil lawsuit being filed [by a state attorney],” Komariah said.
Responding to Komariah’s inquiry, Yusuf admitted that NCB may be misused because there is no legal framework on NCB implementation.
Therefore, he urged the Government to create a legal framework that will enable law enforcers to recover corruption assets without having to file a lawsuit.
Yusuf explained that a legal framework on NCB implementation can be established by amending Law No. 8 of 2010 on Prevention and Eradication of Money Laundering (Money Laundering Law) or issuing a specific law on NCB.
“If there is no specific regulation, abuse of power may occur,” he added.
Yusuf, however, admitted that making a new law is not an easy process. Therefore, the most realistic measure is to wait for the Supreme Court (MA) to formulate a Supreme Court Regulation draft on the implementation of Money Laundering Law, specifically Article 67.
Article 67 (2) of the Anti-Money Laundering Law stipulates that investigators may submit a request to the District Court to declare a suspect’s assets as state assets, if the suspect’s whereabouts cannot be located in 30 days. The court must issue such declaration within seven days after a request is submitted (Article 67 (3), Money Laundering Law).
As one of MA’s work group members on the drafting of the Supreme Court Regulation, Yusuf estimated that the regulation will be issued in one or two months.
(hot/jt)
Abdul Razak Asri, Mahinda Arkyasa
One of the main issues that Indonesian law enforcers continue to face concerns corruption suspects that attempt to escape overseas. This is because when a suspect has escaped, law enforcers lose not only the chance to apprehend the person, but also the chance to recover corruption assets.
However, Muhammad Yusuf, Head of the Indonesian Financial Transaction Reports and Analysis Center (PPATK), explained that even if the suspect has escaped, law enforcers still can recover corruption assets without a lawsuit. This mechanism, as Yusuf explained, is a measure called “non-conviction based asset forfeiture” (NCB).
NCB is a procedure that does not require a conviction (civil or criminal) against an individual in order to confiscate his/her assets. Instead, prosecutors must only prove that the property in question was involved in an illegal activity.
In his dissertation titled ‘Non-Conviction Based Asset Forfeiture: A Solution to Eradicate Corruption in Indonesia’, Yusuf confirmed that NCB is an effective solution for law enforcers who are having difficulties in recovering corruption assets.
“NCB is effective in confiscating corruption assets from suspects who have passed away, suffer from terminal illness, have escaped, or cannot be found,” he explained when defending his doctoral dissertation at Universitas Padjadjaran, in Bandung, Monday (10/12).
Komariah Emong Sapardjaja, member of the dissertation committee, questioned the possibility of abuse of power by law enforcers if NBC is implemented.
“Without a lawsuit, I am worried that law enforcers will act deliberately in confiscating a person’s assets,” Komariah stated.
She argued that asset recovery has been stipulated under Article 32 of Law No. 31 of 1999 on Corruption Eradication, which states that a prosecutor may file a civil lawsuit against corruption suspects.
“State attorneys must be empowered to file a civil lawsuit against corruption suspects. So far, I cannot recall any civil lawsuit being filed [by a state attorney],” Komariah said.
Responding to Komariah’s inquiry, Yusuf admitted that NCB may be misused because there is no legal framework on NCB implementation.
Therefore, he urged the Government to create a legal framework that will enable law enforcers to recover corruption assets without having to file a lawsuit.
Yusuf explained that a legal framework on NCB implementation can be established by amending Law No. 8 of 2010 on Prevention and Eradication of Money Laundering (Money Laundering Law) or issuing a specific law on NCB.
“If there is no specific regulation, abuse of power may occur,” he added.
Yusuf, however, admitted that making a new law is not an easy process. Therefore, the most realistic measure is to wait for the Supreme Court (MA) to formulate a Supreme Court Regulation draft on the implementation of Money Laundering Law, specifically Article 67.
Article 67 (2) of the Anti-Money Laundering Law stipulates that investigators may submit a request to the District Court to declare a suspect’s assets as state assets, if the suspect’s whereabouts cannot be located in 30 days. The court must issue such declaration within seven days after a request is submitted (Article 67 (3), Money Laundering Law).
As one of MA’s work group members on the drafting of the Supreme Court Regulation, Yusuf estimated that the regulation will be issued in one or two months.
(hot/jt)