Asset Forfeiture Must Uphold Fair Trial Principles and Court Decisions
Criminal law expert from Tarumanagara University, Heri Firmansyah, stressed that the principle of fair trial must serve as the primary foundation in the draft Bill on Asset Forfeiture to avoid infringing on citizens’ legal rights.
According to Heri, asset forfeiture is closely linked to coercive actions, so it cannot be carried out without stringent legal mechanisms, including through court decisions.
“The fair trial principle is important to consider because asset forfeiture is always preceded by coercive efforts such as seizures. But in the context of asset forfeiture, it must be preceded by a court decision,” he stated during the General Hearing (RDPU) of House Commission III on Asset Forfeiture at the parliamentary complex in Jakarta on Monday (6/4).
He explained that the urgency of asset forfeiture is not only about punishing the perpetrators but also ensuring that the proceeds of crime can be returned to the state and create a deterrent effect.
“The current trend is not only punishing the perpetrators, but ensuring that the perpetrators do not escape legal snares and create a deterrent effect,” said Heri.
He even likened the assets from crimes as “fresh blood” that sustains the continuity of criminal acts.
“Asset forfeiture is like the fresh blood of a crime. If it is stopped, then the crime also stops,” he asserted.
Nevertheless, Heri reminded that law enforcement must not only chase speed but also prioritise quality and prudence.
“Law enforcement is not just about speedy trial, but also quality and the principle of prudence. If ignored, it can cause problems later on,” he said.
He also highlighted the importance of protecting human rights, transparency, and social control in asset forfeiture policies.
“This issue is not just about officials. It can touch on individual property rights, so it must uphold the principle of equality before the law,” he stated.
Commission III of the House of Representatives received input from legal experts regarding the discussion of the draft Bill on Asset Forfeiture, particularly on the mechanism for handling assets that are disproportionate to the owner’s profile.
The House of Representatives is beginning to delve into the draft Law on Asset Forfeiture as a strategic step to strengthen the recovery of state losses.
The Minister of Law stated that the discussion of the draft Bill on Asset Forfeiture will first wait for the derivative regulations from the Criminal Procedure Code.
Yusril Ihza Mahendra affirmed that the state has the authority to confiscate money from online gambling crimes based on court decisions.
Minister of Law Andi Supratman Agtas believes that the resolution of the draft Law on Asset Forfeiture will proceed quickly.
Legal experts highlighted the importance of clarity in regulations regarding the types of assets that can be forfeited in the draft Bill on Asset Forfeiture to ensure legal certainty.
Criminal law experts spotlighted the importance of clear provisions on the concept of non-conviction based asset forfeiture (NCB) in the draft Bill on Asset Forfeiture.
After being acquitted by the Medan District Court in North Sumatra, videographer Amsal Christy Sitepu participated in the general hearing (RDPU) at House Commission III in Jakarta on Thursday (2/4).