Benny K Harman, a member of Commission III of the DPR from the\nDemocrat Party faction, quoted the ideas of Indonesian independence\nfighter Tan Malaka during a meeting discussing the Asset Seizure Bill in\nCommission III of the DPR on Monday (6\/4).<\/p>\n
The follow-up meeting on drafting the Asset Seizure Bill text invited\ntwo legal experts: Heri Firmansyah from Tarumanagara University in\nJakarta and Oce Madril, Chairman of the Anti-Corruption Studies Centre\n(Pukat) at the Faculty of Law, Gadjah Mada University.<\/p>\n
According to Benny, one of the purposes of the DPR inviting academics\nin drafting the bill is to turn the obscure into the clear, and the\nirrational into the rational.<\/p>\n
\u201cQuoting Tan Malaka\u2019s words, what we need from academics is rational\nlogic, not mystical logic,\u201d Benny said.<\/p>\n
\u201cIf we use mystical logic, our country will never progress. Rational\nlogic is generally developed by our friends in universities,\u201d he\nadded.<\/p>\n
On that occasion, Benny said he wanted to get an overview of why the\nAsset Seizure Bill is considered important. According to Benny, the\nterminology or nomenclature of asset seizure remains vague and\nunclear.<\/p>\n
He said the term still raises several questions, such as who is given\nthe power to seize, and what is being seized.<\/p>\n
\u201cWhat is the state\u2019s legitimacy to seize someone\u2019s wealth, right?\u201d he\nsaid.<\/p>\n
In addition, Benny also questioned who would manage the seized\nassets. Including who oversees the institution designated to carry out\nthe seizure.<\/p>\n
\u201cThese are academic questions that must be answered by the resource\npersons,\u201d Benny said.<\/p>\n
According to him, the DPR is not an academic institution, but a\npolitical one. Therefore, academics must provide several rational\noptions for the DPR.<\/p>\n
\u201cSo that we in the DPR can make choices, called rational choice, in\nthe law-making process,\u201d Benny said.<\/p>\n
In their presentations, the experts provided input on the substance\nof the Asset Seizure Bill before it is officially discussed with the\ngovernment.<\/p>\n
Oce Madril, for example, hopes that the Asset Seizure Bill does not\nonly regulate seizure, but also ensures that asset management provides\neconomic value to the state.<\/p>\n
\u201cThen the second approach that I think should be used is a more\nbalanced approach between how to protect property while also serving the\nstate\u2019s interest in enforcing the law,\u201d Oce said.<\/p>\n
Meanwhile, Heri Firmansyah reminded the DPR that the Asset Seizure\nBill should not violate private property rights. He assessed that the\nAsset Seizure Bill is difficult to achieve because it always has issues\nwith equality in law enforcement.<\/p>\n
\u201cBecause as far as my knowledge and experience, what is quite\ndifficult to achieve in law enforcement is the issue of equality,\u201d Heri\nsaid.<\/p>\n
In response to the various inputs, Commission III also provided\nseveral notes.<\/p>\n
Gerindra highlights the presumption of innocence principle<\/p>\n
Bimantoro, a member of Commission III of the DPR from the Gerindra\nfaction, highlighted the presumption of innocence principle in the\ninvestigation process of alleged corruption cases.<\/p>\n
So far, said Bimantoro, law enforcement officials often create public\nopinion regarding the assets of suspected corruption perpetrators, even\nthough their legal status is not yet clear.<\/p>\n
\u201cNow it seems that before anything happens, right at the beginning,\nissues are already being created, usually by law enforcement officials,\nissues about assets here and there, so this becomes dangerous,\u201d\nBimantoro said.<\/p>\n
Therefore, in the future, he encourages the Asset Seizure Bill to set\nboundaries so that officials cannot build open negative opinions against\nalleged corruption perpetrators.<\/p>\n
\u201cSo don\u2019t let it be that just because there is reasonable suspicion,\nthe origin is not yet clear, from where it was obtained, they are\nalready battered in the public space first,\u201d he said.<\/p>\n
Golkar discusses assets of deceased defendants<\/p>\n
Soedeson Tandra, a member of Commission III of the DPR, raised the\nissue of asset seizure for perpetrators who have died. According to\nSoedeson, the law so far stipulates that criminal penalties are\nextinguished if someone dies.<\/p>\n
He said the future Asset Seizure Bill must regulate this properly.\nTherefore, he proposed that asset seizure for deceased convicts be done\nin another way, namely asset recovery.<\/p>\n
\u201cI agree more with the term asset recovery or in Madurese, asset\nrecovery,\u201d Soedeson said.<\/p>\n
However, in practice, this contradicts several regulations.\nTherefore, such cases must be discussed together.<\/p>\n
PKB questions disguised assets<\/p>\n
Hasbiyallah Ilyas, a member of Commission III of the DPR, questioned\nthe method of asset seizure for corrupt proceeds that are disguised.\nBecause in many cases, he said, not all of the perpetrator\u2019s assets come\nfrom corruption crimes.<\/p>\n
\u201cHow about corrupt proceeds that are disguised?\u201d Hasbiyallah\nsaid.<\/p>\n
According to him, there are many different perceptions in society\ncompared to officials. For the public, asset seizure is interpreted as\nan effort to impoverish corruptors.<\/p>\n
However, for some circles, especially state officials, not all assets\ncome from corruption proceeds.<\/p>\n
\u201cThey understand that asset seizure means taking everything,\nimpoverishing everything, even if it is our own assets, not from\ncorruption proceeds, for example,\u201d Hasbiyallah said.<\/p>\n
PDIP responds to proposal for special agency under the President<\/p>\n
A member of Commission III of the DPR from the PDIP faction said that\nthey will consider the proposal for a special agency authorised to\nexecute asset seizures in the Asset Seizure Bill.<\/p>\n
According to Safaruddin, the Asset Seizure Bill in principle will be\ncarried out by law enforcement officials. However, the Asset Seizure\nBill will only apply if the investigation process does not go well.<\/p>\n
\u201cWhen the criminal act does not proceed well, then the Asset Seizure\nLaw applies, yes, death, fleeing, we will detail it later,\u201d Safaruddin\nsaid.<\/p>\n
The Asset Seizure Bill, which has been proposed since 2008, has not\nbeen passed due to a lack of political priority in the DPR, the\ncomplexity of legal synchronisation (especially related to the Criminal\nProcedure Code), and caution.<\/p>", "url": "https:\/\/jawawa.id\/newsitem\/benny-k-harman-quotes-tan-malaka-if-we-use-mystical-logic-the-country-wont-progress-1775613231", "image": "" }, "sponsor": "Okusi Associates", "sponsor_url": "https:\/\/okusiassociates.com" }