{
    "success": true,
    "data": {
        "id": 1688206,
        "msgid": "discussing-asset-forfeiture-bill-in-parliament-expert-highlights-reverse-burden-of-proof-1776667866",
        "date": "2026-04-20 12:39:07",
        "title": "Discussing Asset Forfeiture Bill in Parliament, Expert Highlights Reverse Burden of Proof",
        "author": "Danu Damarjati",
        "source": "KOMPAS",
        "tags": "",
        "topic": "Legal",
        "summary": "Professor Harkristuti Harkrisnowo from the University of Indonesia has emphasised critical aspects of the proposed Asset Forfeiture Bill during a hearing with Indonesia's House of Representatives Commission III, particularly the reverse burden of proof that shifts the onus onto defendants to demonstrate the legality of their assets. She advocates for combining this with asset-based seizures without prior court rulings to enhance law enforcement effectiveness while warning against unchecked investigative powers and the need for judicial oversight to prevent abuse. Additionally, she calls for stronger protections for third parties, including comprehensive compensation for both material and immaterial losses, and a more balanced legal standing to ensure equality before the law.",
        "content": "<p>JAKARTA, KOMPAS.com - A legal expert from the University of\nIndonesia, Professor Harkristuti Harkrisnowo, has highlighted several\ncrucial aspects that need attention in the formulation of the Asset\nForfeiture Bill (RUU Perampasan Aset), one of which concerns the reverse\nburden of proof.<\/p>\n<p>\u201cIn asset recovery law, the reversal of the burden of proof shifts\nthe responsibility from the state to the defendant to prove that the\nassets were obtained legally,\u201d said Harkristuti Harkrisnowo during a\npublic hearing with Commission III of the House of Representatives (DPR\nRI) on Monday (20\/4\/2026).<\/p>\n<p>According to her, this mechanism can strengthen law enforcement by\nmaking it more difficult to conceal illegal assets, including through\nprocedural delays.<\/p>\n<p>Furthermore, if combined with asset-based seizures without a\npreceding court decision (in rem), its effectiveness is deemed even\nhigher.<\/p>\n<p>In addition, Harkristuti also addressed procedural law aspects in the\nbill.<\/p>\n<p>She criticised the investigators\u2019 authority to request documents from\nvarious parties without adequate limitations.<\/p>\n<p>\u201cThis is somewhat dangerous if investigators are given free rein to\nrequest documents from anywhere,\u201d she said.<\/p>\n<p>She believes there needs to be a safeguarding mechanism, such as\ncourt approval (judicial oversight), to ensure that document requests\nare made proportionately and not abused.<\/p>\n<p>Furthermore, Harkristuti highlighted protections for third parties\nwho may be affected.<\/p>\n<p>She mentioned three main issues: the heavy burden of proof,\ninadequate compensation mechanisms, and the weak legal position of third\nparties in trials.<\/p>\n<p>According to her, compensation provisions should not only cover the\nasset\u2019s value but also immaterial losses such as reputation and lost\nbusiness opportunities.<\/p>\n<p>Moreover, the position of third parties needs to be strengthened to\nalign with the principle of equality before the law (equality of\narms).<\/p>\n<p>Another concern is the concentration of authority in the Attorney\nGeneral\u2019s Office for asset management. In the bill, the Attorney\nGeneral\u2019s Office holds roles from seizure, management, to the sale of\nassets.<\/p>",
        "url": "https:\/\/jawawa.id\/newsitem\/discussing-asset-forfeiture-bill-in-parliament-expert-highlights-reverse-burden-of-proof-1776667866",
        "image": ""
    },
    "sponsor": "Okusi Associates",
    "sponsor_url": "https:\/\/okusiassociates.com"
}