Online sexual abuse and exploitation of children is a serious global issue nowadays. In Indonesia, data from the Ministry of Women’s Empowerment and Child Protection (KemenPPA) shows that the number of reported child violence cases reached 24,158 in 2023. Of this total, sexual violence was the most common, with 10,932 cases. The key problem lies in the gap within the Legal Framework for addressing Child Sexual Exploitation in Indonesia. The issue is becoming more serious because the financial sector also plays a role, as perpetrators use financial means to carry out their actions. This has not been adequately addressed by Indonesia’s legal framework. Although Indonesia has prohibited and imposed penalties for perpetrators of child sexual exploitation and online sexual exploitation (for example, through the Criminal Code, Child Protection Law, Law on Sexual Violence, Pornography Law, and Electronic Information and Transactions Law), efforts to address the misuse of the financial sector by perpetrators have not been reflected in laws governing the financial services sector (such as the Indonesia Financial Services Authority Law, Banking Law, Indonesia Financial Services Authority Regulations, etc.). This paper, through a doctrinal research approach, examines the extent to which Indonesia’s legal framework addresses child sexual exploitation in accordance with international standards, conventions, trends, and developments. By analyzing how other countries—such as England, Wales, Sweden, the United States, and Australia—handle child sexual exploitation, particularly in relation to financial service providers, Indonesia can learn valuable lessons. In conclusion, this paper finds that Indonesia’s legal framework is insufficient to address child sexual exploitation and abuse involving financial means.

This study aimed to investigate the use of digital information and communication technology in the form of crypto assets as proceeds of crime in money laundering action, due to the multi-layered security of the blockchain. This phenomenon was presented on a global scale in transnational crimes, providing challenges for Indonesian law enforcement officials in hunting the crypto assets scattered outside its legal jurisdiction. The results showed that Police Investigators and General Prosecutors utilizing penal and non-penal approaches in performing the crypto assets tracing, seizing and recovering, which shows the importance of maintaining formal and informal cooperation with other countries through the Financial Intelligence Units (FIUs) and Interpol, besides developing domestic regulations in controlling the crypto assets physical trading. Due to legal uncertainty of storing and releasing crypto assets, the investigators and the prosecutors faced disagreement in determine the procedures, which then affected the asset recovery process of Indra Kesuma case. This study proposed potential models for effective management on confiscated crypto assets that law enforcement officials could adopt in recovering these assets such as seizure orders, confiscation orders, and pre-confiscation sale. This was a legal study conducted by collecting data through literature reviews and interviews.

This research aims to  analyze  the implementation of asset forfeiture resulting from criminal acts in Indonesia and compare it with implementation in Australia from a responsive legal perspective. The results of this comparison are expected to provide solutions to the problem of implementing asset forfeiture in Indonesia. This research needs to be discussed more because the practice of asset forfeiture in Indonesia cannot recover state financial losses. The research method used in this study is a normative juridical research method using legal comparisons. The novelty of this study is to compare the implementation of  non-conviction  based asset forfeiture  in Australia and add examples of criminal cases. This research concluded that the asset forfeiture with criminal forfeiture in Indonesia  implemented based on existing laws and regulations have not been able to accommodate the social needs of the community in the return of state financial losses, as practiced in Australia. Therefore, Indonesia needs to establish a law on  non-conviction based asset forfeiture  whose regulatory material refers to the 36 (thirty-six) key concepts of  non-conviction  based asset forfeiture.  Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk menganalisis pelaksanaan perampasan aset hasil tindak pidana di Indonesia dan membandingkannya dengan pelaksanaan di Australia ditinjau dari perspektif hukum responsif. Hasil perbandingan ini diharapkan memberikan solusi atas permasalahan pelaksanaan perampasan aset di Indonesia. Penelitian ini dilatarbelakangi oleh praktik pelaksanaan perampasan aset hasil tindak pidana di Indonesia yang tidak dapat mengembalikan kerugian keuangan negara. Metode penelitian yang digunakan dalam penelitian ini adalah metode penelitian yuridis normatif dengan menggunakan perbandingan hukum. Kebaruan dari penelitian ini adalah dengan membandingkan pelaksanaan perampasan aset tanpa pemidanaan di Australia serta menambahkan contoh kasus tindak pidana. Penelitian ini menyimpulkan bahwa perampasan aset dengan pemidanaan atau criminal forfeiture di Indonesia yang dilaksanakan berdasarkan peraturan perundang-undangan yang berlaku saat ini belum dapat mengakomodir kebutuhan sosial masyarakat dalam pengembalian kerugian keuangan negara, sebagaimana dipraktikkan di Australia. Indonesia perlu membentuk suatu peraturan perundang-undangan perampasan aset tanpa pemidanaan yang materi pengaturannya mengacu pada 36 (tiga puluh enam) konsep kunci perampasan aset tanpa pemidanaan.