DPR Questions the Origin of the Term "Confiscation" in the Asset Confiscation Bill

JAKARTA, KOMPAS.com - The origins of the naming of the Asset Confiscation Bill (RUU Perampasan Aset) have come under scrutiny during discussions in the House of Representatives (DPR).

The term “confiscation” is seen as raising questions, particularly when compared to internationally recognised terminology, which is more commonly known as “recovery” or asset recovery.

Chairman of Commission III of the DPR RI, Habiburokhman, questioned the basis for using the term.

He assessed that in a global context, the terminology used refers to “asset recovery,” which means recovery, not confiscation.

In response, legal expert from the University of Indonesia, Harkristuti Harkrisnowo, admitted to questioning the same issue.

According to him, in legal terminology, “confiscation” is closer to the term “confiscation,” not “recovery.”

“I also wondered yesterday, why did recovery become confiscation? Because it should be confiscation if it’s confiscation. I was also forced to answer that I don’t know why suddenly in our country we use that term,” said Harkristuti.

Meanwhile, Habiburokhman added that the term “asset confiscation” also developed from public aspirations.

He mentioned that the term is frequently used by the public, including in various demonstration actions that pushed for the enactment of the regulation.

“BKD absorbs what’s in society too, Prof. In the media, all sorts of things, that’s the demand. Friends who demonstrated at the DPR, it’s confiscation,” he said.

He recalled that the naming has been around since approximately 2003 and continues to be used until now.

“From the beginning, it was already called the Asset Confiscation Bill. So, since 23 years ago,” he said.