Indonesian Political, Business & Finance News

Expert Proposes Renaming Asset Forfeiture Bill to 'Asset Protection' in DPR Hearing

| Source: CNN_ID Translated from Indonesian | Legal
Expert Proposes Renaming Asset Forfeiture Bill to 'Asset Protection' in DPR Hearing
Image: CNN_ID

Public policy expert Bambang Harymurti has proposed changing the nomenclature of the Asset Forfeiture Bill to the Asset Protection Bill. The suggestion was made by BHM, as he is familiarly known, during a public hearing on the bill with the House of Representatives’ (DPR) Commission III on Tuesday (11/8). According to Bambang, rather than seizing assets, the bill should more appropriately aim to recover state assets.

‘What is actually a more appropriate title for the Asset Forfeiture Act? I am trying to propose that the title of the law should be Protecting Assets, the People’s Assets and Their Recovery,’ Bambang said during the hearing.

Bambang, who is also a senior journalist, cautioned that the Asset Forfeiture Bill in practice would grant the state significant power to take an individual’s wealth. He subsequently proposed ten protective guardrails to serve as guidelines in the bill’s future deliberation.

‘Do not let the Asset Forfeiture Act end up legalising acts of abuse into legal asset theft,’ he stated.

Bambang detailed that the first protective guardrail is that permanent asset forfeiture must be decided by an independent court. Second, the state must continue to bear the burden of proof. Third, there must be a clear and strict standard of proof. Fourth, seizure without a court order must be limited only to extraordinary circumstances. Fifth, unexplained wealth cannot automatically be considered assets derived from crime.

Sixth, bona fide third parties and innocent spouses must be protected. Seventh, there must be a factual and temporal connection between the criminal act and the asset. Eighth, seized assets must be managed by a transparent and independent institution. Ninth, there must be restitution and compensation for wrongful forfeiture. Tenth, the abuse of authority for political purposes must be prohibited.

‘The authority to seize assets must not be entrusted solely to the goodwill of the officials currently in power,’ Bambang asserted.

View JSON | Print