Publication Search

The proposed Asset Seizure Bill has become urgent because the existing criminal justice system, as stipulated in the Corruption Eradication Law and the Money Laundering Law, has not been effective in recovering assets derived from crime, especially if the defendant dies, flees, or the criminal proceedings are halted. This study aims to analyze in detail the extent to which the Asset Seizure Bill can be integrated into the existing criminal and civil procedural law framework in Indonesia, as well as how a transparent and accountable mechanism for managing seized assets can be established for the recovery of assets in the public interest. The method used is normative legal research with a legal, conceptual, case, and comparative approach. The findings show that this bill adopts the mechanism of Asset Forfeiture Without Criminalization with an in-rem approach (targeting assets, not perpetrators) through civil court proceedings, as well as implementing the concept of unexplained wealth to expand the scope of forfeiture and close legal loopholes. The implication is that this bill is a strategic instrument in eradicating corruption and recovering state losses amounting to trillions of rupiah, but its success is highly dependent on careful formulation, ensuring due process of law, and the existence of political will and readiness of law enforcement officials.

Illegal wildlife capture and trade is a form of crime that has a serious impact on environmental sustainability. This practice not only disrupts the balance of the ecosystem but also threatens the sustainability of biodiversity, a vital asset for the nation and the world. Lampung Province is a strategic region for wildlife trafficking due to its proximity to inter-island distribution routes. This condition makes Lampung one of the provinces with the highest number of wildlife confiscations in Indonesia, thus requiring increased attention from various parties. This study aims to analyze the factors causing illegal wildlife capture and trade, while also identifying mitigation efforts. The research method used is a combination of normative and empirical juridical. Data were obtained through literature review and interviews with relevant agencies, then analyzed qualitatively using an interactive approach and legal interpretation. The results show that economic factors, socio-cultural factors, education levels, environmental conditions, and hobby-based activities are the main triggers for the rise in wildlife crime. Economic motives often drive people to get involved due to the high selling price of wildlife, while socio-cultural factors and low legal awareness exacerbate the situation. An environment that supports fishing activities, along with demand from certain hobbies such as animal collecting, further increases the opportunity for violations. In response, the Lampung Regional Police, in collaboration with the Natural Resources Conservation Agency (BKSDA) SKW III Bengkulu-Lampung, have implemented penal measures through law enforcement, as well as non-penal measures through education, outreach, and community empowerment. This study concludes that synergy between law enforcement, active community participation, and sustainable prevention strategies is key to reducing the rate of wildlife crime. With integrated collaboration, it is hoped that biodiversity can be maintained for the sustainability of the ecosystem in the future.

In order to determine who has the right to take business assets implicated in money laundering offenses, this paper examines the legal loophole in Law Number 8 of 2010 about the Prevention and Eradication of Money Laundering offenses (UU TPPU). The efficacy of law enforcement may be weakened and the process of recovering assets from crimes may be hampered by the ambiguous authority and lack of regulatory synchronization. Combining a statutory and conceptual approach with a normative legal technique, this study examines the implications of legal uncertainty on the mechanism of asset confiscation in eradicating TPPU. This research result indicates that the lack of authority in implementing asset forfeiture consequences results in inconsistent legal procedures, overlapping institutional roles, and slows down the recovery of state assets. Therefore, legal reform is needed through amendments to Article 9 of the TPPU Law and alignment with the Criminal Code (KUHP) and other related regulations so that the mechanism of asset confiscation is more precise, more effective, and coordinated. In addition, synergy between investigators, prosecutors, The Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK), and the Financial Transaction Reports and Analysis Center (PPATK) are essential for improving the efficiency of state asset recovery. Regulations and an integrated system make it possible to swiftly and publicly seize assets resulting from criminal activity, which deters criminals, enhances public trust in law enforcement, and ensures that assets obtained illegally can be returned for the benefit of the state and society, while reinforcing the integrity of the justice system.

The development of corruption nowadays is accompanied by other crimes related to hide assets from corruption and one way of it is by money laundering mechanism. The mechanism of it is contained in the Criminal Code, Criminal Procedure Code, Law No. 20/2001 jo. Law No. 31/1999 concerning the Eradication of Corruption and Law No. 8/2010 concerning Prevention and Eradication of the Crime of Money Laundering. There are also international legal instruments adopted to strengthen efforts to seize assets from criminal acts of corruption, such as UNCAC which was ratified by the Government of Indonesia into Law Number 7/2006 concerning Ratification of the UNCAC on April 18, 2006. Indonesia needs a regulation that has stronger legal force and has a special mechanism regarding the mechanism for the confiscation of assets and assets that are suspected of being obtained as a result of corruption. It can be suggested to the Government and the legislature to encourage the discussion and passing of the asset confiscation bill’s immediately.

The Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK) plays a crucial role in combating corruption in Indonesia. This institution was established to address various corruption cases involving public officials, with the aim of increasing transparency, accountability, and justice in government administration. However, KPK faces numerous challenges in carrying out its duties, such as revisions to laws that limit its authority and obstacles in coordination with other law enforcement agencies. The factors causing corruption in Indonesia are complex, including weak oversight, a permissive culture towards corruption, and lack of transparency in state budget management. KPK not only focuses on taking action against corruption perpetrators but also strives to recover state losses through asset confiscation mechanisms. Despite this, KPK's effectiveness in combating corruption is often hindered by both internal and external challenges. Therefore, it is important to continuously strengthen coordination among law enforcement agencies and encourage legal reforms to enhance this institution. With stronger commitment from all parties, corruption eradication in Indonesia can be more effective, leading to a clean government free from corruption practices.

Islam, as a perfect religion, teaches the values of honesty, justice, and transparency in various aspects of life, including economics and business. The prohibition of Tadlis (fraud in transactions), Ihtikar (hoarding goods for unfair profit), and Ghulul (corruption or betrayal of public trust) has been emphasized by Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) to protect society from harmful economic practices. This study aims to analyze the 2025 Pertamina corruption case from the perspective of Islamic prohibitions against Tadlis, Ihtikar, and Ghulul. This research employs a qualitative approach using a case study method, relying on secondary data from scholarly journals, news articles, and other relevant literature. The findings reveal that the corruption case reflects Tadlis through the manipulation of fuel quality information, Ihtikar through unfair price control, and Ghulul through the misappropriation of public funds, resulting in state losses amounting to trillions of rupiah and eroding public trust in the government. The study highlights that corruption is not only a violation of state law but also a moral crime that contradicts Islamic principles. The application of Islamic legal values, such as Ta’zir sanctions in the form of fines, asset confiscation, and severe punishments, can serve as preventive and repressive measures against corruption. Thus, this study aims to contribute to strengthening anti-corruption policies based on Islamic ethics while promoting transparency and justice in national economic governance.

Current efforts to eradicate corruption are not only focused on arresting and imposing criminal sanctions on perpetrators, but also through efforts to restore the country's financial and economic losses by confiscating assets or property belonging to perpetrators of corruption. Asset recovery or confiscation of assets from perpetrators of corruption is an important thing that must be considered in handling corruption cases, as a form of recovery of state losses. Therefore, there must be a good policy formulation to support the implementation of asset recovery. Indonesia needs special regulations or rules that have legal force and have special rules regarding the mechanism for confiscating assets and property suspected of being obtained from the proceeds of corruption. This study is entitled Asset Confiscation as a Form of Punishment for Perpetrators of Corruption. The purpose of this study is to determine and explain legal policies related to asset confiscation.