{
    "success": true,
    "data": {
        "id": 1668607,
        "msgid": "reasons-why-this-dpr-member-says-the-asset-confiscation-bill-could-violate-the-constitution-1775793051",
        "date": "2026-04-10 10:10:42",
        "title": "Reasons Why This DPR Member Says the Asset Confiscation Bill Could Violate the Constitution",
        "author": "",
        "source": "CNN_ID",
        "tags": "",
        "topic": "Legal",
        "summary": "A member of the Indonesian House of Representatives' Commission III, Soedeson Tandra, has raised concerns that the draft Asset Confiscation Bill (RUU Perampasan Aset) may conflict with the 1945 Constitution and core principles of Indonesian civil law. He argues that the bill's focus on non-conviction-based asset seizure, which targets property directly (in rem) rather than individuals (in personam), risks violating citizens' rights to property protection under Article 28 of the Constitution and judicial due process as outlined in Law No. 6 on Judicial Power. Soedeson warns that bypassing established civil procedures for property transfer could lead to premature and unlawful state actions, potentially undermining the rule of law.",
        "content": "<p>A member of Commission III of the House of Representatives, Soedeson\nTandra, has revealed the reasons why the Asset Confiscation Bill could\npotentially violate several legal principles and the 1945\nConstitution.<\/p>\n<p>The Asset Confiscation Bill is currently in the process of absorbing\naspirations from various parties, including experts, academics, and\nstudents in Commission III of the House of Representatives. The bill\nmust first be established as an initiative proposal before it can be\nofficially discussed with the government.<\/p>\n<p>According to Soedeson, the mechanisms outlined in the current draft\nof the Asset Confiscation Bill could harm the character of Indonesian\nlaw, which adheres to a civil law system and is in personam (focused on\nthe person) rather than in rem (focused on the thing).<\/p>\n<p>\u201cThis has been a concern of mine from the start. Because asset\nconfiscation focuses on in rem, on the property. Yet our character is\ncivil law, \u2018whoever\u2019, in personam,\u201d said Soedeson in his statement on\nThursday (9\/4).<\/p>\n<p>He particularly highlighted the mechanism for asset confiscation that\ncan be carried out without a criminal court decision or on a\nnon-conviction basis.<\/p>\n<p>Soedeson explained that the mechanism for confiscation without\ncriminal proceedings risks violating Article 28 of the 1945\nConstitution. Every citizen, without exception, is entitled to\nprotection of their property. He referred to Article 6 of the Law on\nJudicial Power, which states that a person cannot be declared guilty\nwithout a valid judge\u2019s decision.<\/p>\n<p>\u201cCitizens, including criminals, have their property protected by the\nConstitution. A person cannot be declared guilty without a judge\u2019s\ndecision. That\u2019s clear,\u201d said the Golkar politician.<\/p>\n<p>Soedeson also examined the asset confiscation mechanism from the\nperspective of civil law, which could potentially violate\nregulations.<\/p>\n<p>He stated that the transfer of property rights in Indonesia has rigid\nprocedures, from agreements to administrative handover processes\n(levering).<\/p>\n<p>Soedeson is concerned that if the Asset Confiscation Bill ignores\nthese processes, the state will take actions that are legally considered\npremature.<\/p>\n<p>\u201cSeize first, then confiscate after the decision. Even the word\n\u2018confiscate\u2019 without due process is wrong to me. Law is a process; it\ncan\u2019t suddenly be taken just because (the assets) are excessive. That\u2019s\nvery dangerous,\u201d he said.<\/p>",
        "url": "https:\/\/jawawa.id\/newsitem\/reasons-why-this-dpr-member-says-the-asset-confiscation-bill-could-violate-the-constitution-1775793051",
        "image": ""
    },
    "sponsor": "Okusi Associates",
    "sponsor_url": "https:\/\/okusiassociates.com"
}