DPR Reviews Nomenclature of Asset Forfeiture Bill, Considers 'Asset Recovery'

The House of Representatives (DPR) Commission III has received various inputs from civil society regarding the drafting of the Asset Forfeiture Bill, including a proposal to change its nomenclature. Commission III Chairman Habiburokhman stated that there is a suggestion for the bill to use the term ‘asset recovery’. He noted that the term ‘asset recovery’ for regulations concerning the seizure of proceeds from criminal acts is stipulated in the United Nations Convention Against Corruption. Habiburokhman said he previously asked academic Yusuf Saefudin from the University of Muhamadiyah Purwokerto about the bill’s nomenclature during a public hearing. ‘According to Mr Yusuf, if we want to create a law that comprehensively addresses loss recovery, investigation, examination, prosecution, and other procedural laws, it is called asset recovery,’ he said at the DPR complex in Jakarta on Monday, 13 July 2026. He explained that asset forfeiture only occurs at the final stage of seizing a corruptor’s illegal assets. ‘So, if we want a complete law, the suggestion is to call it asset recovery,’ Habiburokhman said. However, he confirmed that the commission has not yet made a decision on the bill’s nomenclature. The Gerindra Party politician stated that he still wants to seek input and views from other elements of society. ‘Each member of Commission III will formulate and discuss their stance later,’ he said. Additionally, Commission III received input regarding the establishment of a special agency to manage assets seized from criminal acts. He said that the task of managing seized assets is not appropriate for the Attorney General’s Office. ‘The prosecutor’s office’s duties are to investigate, prosecute, and so on. The prosecutor’s office has no track record in asset management,’ he said. The legal commission does not want the drafting of the Asset Forfeiture Bill to be rushed. Habiburokhman said this is because regulations on asset forfeiture have never existed in Indonesia before. Therefore, he said it is reasonable for the drafting process to be gradual and lengthy. He noted that the drafting of this bill has been carried out over three DPR sitting periods. ‘If other laws that are amendments, like the Criminal Procedure Code or the revision of the National Police Law, which do not have many articles, are discussed for a long time in public hearings, what more a law that we are forming from scratch,’ he said.