{
    "success": true,
    "data": {
        "id": 1897552,
        "msgid": "dpr-highlights-statute-of-limitations-as-key-issue-in-asset-forfeiture-bill-1785754295",
        "date": "2026-08-03 17:01:00",
        "title": "DPR Highlights Statute of Limitations as Key Issue in Asset Forfeiture Bill",
        "author": "Indriyani Astuti",
        "source": "MEDIA_INDONESIA",
        "tags": "",
        "topic": "Legal",
        "summary": "A member of the Indonesian House of Representatives has stressed that the country does not lack legal mechanisms for asset forfeiture, but requires clarity on the statute of limitations for prosecution. The legislator argued that the upcoming Asset Forfeiture Bill must focus on strengthening legal certainty, protecting bona fide third parties, and ensuring law enforcement accountability. The discussion highlighted existing Supreme Court regulations while calling for specific provisions to prevent abuse of power and interpretation disputes.",
        "content": "<p>A member of the DPR RI\u2019s Commission III, Nasyirul Falah Amru (Gus\nFalah), has affirmed that Indonesia does not suffer from a legal vacuum\nregarding the procedures for forfeiting assets derived from criminal\noffences. However, there is no legal instrument governing the expiry\nperiod for asset prosecution.<\/p>\n<p>He said the Supreme Court (MA) has issued a number of regulations\ngoverning the mechanism for handling assets in criminal cases.<\/p>\n<p>Therefore, Gus Falah believes the drafting of the Asset Forfeiture\nBill should focus on strengthening legal certainty, guaranteeing\nprotection for third parties acting in good faith, and regulating the\naccountability of law enforcement officials.<\/p>\n<p>\u201cIn truth, there is no legal vacuum concerning the procedural process\nof asset forfeiture. There are already two Supreme Court Regulations\ngoverning that mechanism, even though they use the terminology of asset\nhandling,\u201d Gus Falah said during a Public Hearing (RDPU) at the\nParliamentary Complex in Senayan, Jakarta, on Monday (3\/8\/2026).<\/p>\n<p>Gus Falah referred to two Supreme Court Regulations (Perma): Perma\nNumber 1 of 2013 on the Procedures for Resolving Applications for the\nHandling of Assets in Money Laundering Offences (TPPU), and Perma Number\n2 of 2022 on the Procedures for Resolving Objections from Third Parties\nActing in Good Faith in Corruption Cases.<\/p>\n<p>The PDI Perjuangan politician also highlighted the need for clear\nrules on the expiry period for asset prosecution so as to avoid\ndivergent interpretations in the future.<\/p>\n<p>\u201cThe issue of the expiry period is very important. Whether it will\nfollow the prevailing criminal law provisions or be formulated\nseparately within this bill, so as to provide legal certainty in its\nimplementation,\u201d he explained.<\/p>\n<p>Furthermore, Gus Falah emphasised the importance of the Asset\nForfeiture Bill containing norms governing sanctions and the\naccountability of law enforcement officials in order to prevent abuse of\npower.<\/p>\n<p>He explained that oversight and accountability mechanisms need to be\nregulated in the Asset Forfeiture Bill because they are crucial for\nanticipating potential wrongful seizures, the embezzlement of evidence,\nand actions by investigators that result in a decline in the economic\nvalue of forfeited assets.<\/p>",
        "url": "https:\/\/jawawa.id\/newsitem\/dpr-highlights-statute-of-limitations-as-key-issue-in-asset-forfeiture-bill-1785754295",
        "image": ""
    },
    "sponsor": "Okusi Associates",
    "sponsor_url": "https:\/\/okusiassociates.com"
}