Finance Ministry: Utilisation of Seized Assets Managed Strictly and Multi-Layered
Jakarta (ANTARA) - The Ministry of Finance (Kemenkeu) states that the utilisation of seized assets by the government without auction is managed strictly and in multiple layers to avoid the risk of conflicts of interest.
“The mechanism for utilising seized assets without auction (asset takeover) is still carried out within strict and multi-layered governance, so as not to open room for misuse or conflicts of interest,” said the Head of the Communication and Information Services Bureau of Kemenkeu, Deni Surjantoro, to ANTARA in Jakarta on Wednesday.
Deni explained that the process of utilising seized assets without auction must go through applications from ministries/institutions, processed by the debt handler, and determined through decisions by the State Debt Affairs Committee (PUPN).
With this series of processes, the utilisation of seized assets is not done unilaterally, but through a check and balance mechanism that can be accounted for administratively and legally.
“In addition, its implementation reflects good governance principles, including notification to the debt guarantor, as well as valuation mechanisms by government/public appraisers and reviews by the Financial and Development Supervisory Agency (BPKP),” he said.
As a note, Finance Minister Purbaya Yudhi Sadewa has set new rules for managing state debts through Ministerial Regulation (PMK) No. 23 of 2026, which revises PMK 240/2016 on State Debt Management.
The consideration for PMK 23/2026 states that changes to the previous regulations are needed to improve the optimisation of state debt resolution in line with developments in state debt management.
One of the changes in the new regulation is the addition of an inserted article in Article 186A, which states that collateral goods or other assets belonging to the debt guarantor that have been seized by the state can be utilised by the government through PUPN without needing the debt guarantor’s approval.
Utilisation by the PUPN branch without the Debt Guarantor’s/Debt Surety’s approval and the results used to reduce the Debt Guarantor’s debt, according to Article 186A Paragraph (1) point b.
Meanwhile, Article 186B explains that utilisation by the state is carried out with provisions that the Seizure Order Letter (SPP) and seizure minutes must have been issued, the ministry/institution as the applicant must submit a written application to the debt handler, and implementation is carried out after the issuance of the decision by the PUPN branch chairman.
The ministry/institution’s application must also include an analysis explaining that the asset utilisation is for government operations or public interest, as well as willingness to accept the asset in its current physical condition (as is) and bear all outstanding costs.
After all requirements are met, the PUPN branch chairman will issue a decision on asset utilisation within a maximum of 10 working days.
State control of the asset applies for a period of two years, without reducing the debt of the debt guarantor/surety.
In Article 186C, applications can not only be submitted by ministries or institutions, but also by state-owned enterprises (BUMN), regional owned enterprises (BUMD), village-owned enterprises (BUMDes), individuals, to supporting units for government and state operations such as ASN associations or TNI/Polri.
Other business entities and other legal entities such as limited liability companies, cooperatives, and various forms of partnerships are also included in the parties that can submit such applications.
The assets that can be forcibly transferred include movable and financial assets, such as cash, digital or crypto assets, deposits in financial institutions (deposits, savings, up to current accounts), as well as instruments such as bonds, shares, receivables, and capital participations.
For assets in the form of land and buildings, the requirements that must be met include already certified in the name of the relevant party, not in legal disputes, not controlled by third parties unlawfully, and not pledged to other creditors.
Article 297D also emphasises that debt payment through asset takeover will only reduce the principal amount of the debt guarantor’s or surety’s debt. This mechanism does not reduce state debt management administrative costs.