Former KPK Leader Reminds DPR: Do Not Abruptly Seize Assets Without Criminal Offences

Jakarta - Legal expert and former KPK leader Chandra Hamzah has warned that asset seizures in the Draft Law on Asset Seizure should not be carried out without a basis in criminal offences. According to him, asset seizures must still respect an individual’s property rights as recognised in international legal principles. “Does asset seizure require or relate to an underlying criminal offence? This is a very fundamental question; do not abruptly seize someone’s assets without any offence, without any criminality,” said Chandra during a public hearing with Commission III of the DPR RI on the Draft Law on Asset Seizure on Wednesday (8/4/2026). “This is a right to property ownership, ownership of goods and assets recognised by the International Commission of Jurists, the UN Charter, and so on. That is the first question and it deserves reflection,” he added. Chandra stressed that asset seizures cannot stand alone without a clear criminal process. The concept is similar to money laundering offences, which require an underlying crime. “So, it’s something like that. There must be a criminal offence, and if the criminal procedural law process fails, then turn to asset seizure for asset recovery,” said Chandra. He also cited international practices, including guidelines from the World Bank through the Stolen Asset Recovery (StAR) initiative. In those guidelines, asset seizures without a criminal conviction can be carried out under certain conditions, namely when criminal proceedings are not possible or have failed. However, he reminded that such mechanisms still do not eliminate the need for suspicion of a criminal offence as the basis. “Asset seizure without conviction is not without punishment, but without criminal proceedings; we cannot translate conviction-based as a court decision, but criminal,” explained Chandra. Therefore, Chandra urged Commission III of the DPR RI to carefully consider the philosophical, juridical, and practical aspects before drafting and passing the Draft Law on Asset Seizure. Chandra affirmed that the primary purpose of law is not merely to return assets, but to create certainty and justice in society. “The purpose of law is not about asset recovery. The purpose of law is peace in interpersonal relations,” he concluded.