Ada Pertanyaan? Hubungi Kami 
Ada Pertanyaan? Hubungi Kami Rofiq Hidayat, Andin Aditya Rahman
Yunus Husein, Legal Deputy at the Presidential Work Unit for Development Monitoring and Oversight, expressed his view that Indonesia is in need of a regulatory framework on unlawful enrichment to deter corruption by government officials.
“Such a framework on unlawful enrichment will not only prevent and eradicate corruption but will also optimize international cooperation and asset recovery,” stated Yunus during a panel discussion in Jakarta last Friday.
As of today, at least 43 countries have regulated unlawful enrichment, including Argentina, India, and Australia. Based on the example of these countries, Yunus provided a few points on how the Indonesian model could look and what it should incorporate.
Firstly, the primary purpose of an unlawful enrichment regulation is to prevent and eliminate corruption, to essentially cleanse the government of unlawful behavior.
Secondly, the unlawful enrichment regulation will reverse the burden of proof onto the defendant. According to Yunus, if the defendant cannot explain the source of his or her assets, the government may seize such assets.
Thirdly, Yunus is of the opinion that the formulation of a formal offense prohibiting acts of unlawful enrichment will ease burden of proof requirements.
“An example is whether or not there is state loss. In the United Nations Convention Against Corruption, corruption does not always relate to the occurrence of a state loss,” he explained.
Another question that arose during discussions was whether to impose criminal or administrative sanctions on acts of unlawful enrichment. In response to this question, Yunus explained that “there are some countries that impose criminal sanctions, and there are others that impose administrative penalties.”
Fourthly, a specialized procedural law and rules for unlawful enrichment cases is needed. Such a law must implicitly state the government institution authorized to initiate inquiries and investigations.
And finally, the implementation of unlawful enrichment provisions must be followed by administrative improvements within government institutions, including those related to the management of citizen, land, motor vehicles, and taxation administration systems.
“Without the strengthening and improvement of these systems, it will be very difficult to implement a law on unlawful enrichment,” asserted Yunus.
(hot/kc)
Rofiq Hidayat, Andin Aditya Rahman
Yunus Husein, Legal Deputy at the Presidential Work Unit for Development Monitoring and Oversight, expressed his view that Indonesia is in need of a regulatory framework on unlawful enrichment to deter corruption by government officials.
“Such a framework on unlawful enrichment will not only prevent and eradicate corruption but will also optimize international cooperation and asset recovery,” stated Yunus during a panel discussion in Jakarta last Friday.
As of today, at least 43 countries have regulated unlawful enrichment, including Argentina, India, and Australia. Based on the example of these countries, Yunus provided a few points on how the Indonesian model could look and what it should incorporate.
Firstly, the primary purpose of an unlawful enrichment regulation is to prevent and eliminate corruption, to essentially cleanse the government of unlawful behavior.
Secondly, the unlawful enrichment regulation will reverse the burden of proof onto the defendant. According to Yunus, if the defendant cannot explain the source of his or her assets, the government may seize such assets.
Thirdly, Yunus is of the opinion that the formulation of a formal offense prohibiting acts of unlawful enrichment will ease burden of proof requirements.
“An example is whether or not there is state loss. In the United Nations Convention Against Corruption, corruption does not always relate to the occurrence of a state loss,” he explained.
Another question that arose during discussions was whether to impose criminal or administrative sanctions on acts of unlawful enrichment. In response to this question, Yunus explained that “there are some countries that impose criminal sanctions, and there are others that impose administrative penalties.”
Fourthly, a specialized procedural law and rules for unlawful enrichment cases is needed. Such a law must implicitly state the government institution authorized to initiate inquiries and investigations.
And finally, the implementation of unlawful enrichment provisions must be followed by administrative improvements within government institutions, including those related to the management of citizen, land, motor vehicles, and taxation administration systems.
“Without the strengthening and improvement of these systems, it will be very difficult to implement a law on unlawful enrichment,” asserted Yunus.
(hot/kc)