Financial Crimes Such As Kresna Life Often Occurs, Beneficiary Owners Must Be Pursued

Illustration (Photo: Doc Antara)

JAKARTA Financial crime still often occurs. One of them that is currently being paid attention to the public is the benificial owner or owner of the benefits, namely the person who can appoint or dismiss the board of directors, board of commissioners, administrators, coaches, or supervisors in corporations.

In addition, it has the ability to control corporations, have the right to and/or receive benefits from corporations, either directly or indirectly.

Legal observer Yunus Husein said the beneficial owner was the person behind the scenes who controlled the company as a whole.

This happened in the case of Kresna Life. According to Yunus, Kresna Life owner Michael Steven is a beneficial owner who harms customers.

"So if you want to find a financial crime, don't just look for the company. Chasing the person behind the company, chasing Michael, he is a beneficial owner who controls everything, he is the one who plays, he is the one who uses the company," said Yunus in his statement, Wednesday, August 14.

For the record, Kresna Group owner Michael Steven was named a suspect by the National Police Criminal Investigation Unit for a case involving PT Kresna Sekuritas, as reported by CNBC on September 13, 2023.

Even though he has been named a suspect, MS can still win a lawsuit against the Financial Services Authority (OJK) in three cases at the Jakarta State Administrative Court (PTUN).

He explained that fugitives who filed lawsuits in criminal and civil cases had violated the principles of Fugitative Disentilement Doctrine. He is considered not to respect the court.

On the other hand, Yunus criticized the administration of supervision in the insurance sector which is not as good as the administration of supervision in the banking sector.

"Because of the lack of neatness, this administration can be used as loopholes to file a lawsuit in the Administrative Court. However, in this case, I see that the gap is not because of it (administration), but because of unclear factors. The fugitive period can win many times," he said.

The chairman of the Prosecutor's Commission of the Republic of Indonesia, Pujiyono Suwadi, said the same thing.

Pujiyono assessed that in the Kresna Life case, careful law enforcement is needed, especially the judges in the Administrative Court. Otherwise, it will lead to bad precedents.

"In the Administrative Court, such as pre-trial, what is being tried are formal evidence. Therefore, the administrative accuracy of policymakers must be correct. Regarding Kresna Life, these formal matters are not obeyed, so the problem is. Even if we also question the insensitivity of the decision (of the adjutant)," he said.

According to him, OJK is in accordance with procedures in handling the Kresna Life case.

A number of stages have been taken, until finally closing the Kresna Life business license.

So, what is the solution to the Kresna Life case that is still rolling on the court?

Pujiyono explained that the important point is the courage of the legal apparatus which begins with the OJK.

"Most of the decisions of the Administrative Court in its execution can be circumvented. Many Administrative Court decisions win on paper. It's just a matter of how brave the OJK legal team is," he explained.

The next solution, said Pujiyono, is that if OJK wants to intervene in the Kresna Life case, it can be 'run away' in a corruption case. That way, other law enforcement officers can be involved in this case.

In addition, said Pujiyono, there are several important lessons in the Kresna Life case. First, the importance of strict supervision of financial products, especially those that offer high returns.

Second, the urgency of increasing public financial literacy to be more critical in assessing investment products.

"Finally, the need to strengthen regulations related to the transparency of company ownership to prevent detrimental ultimate beneficial owners," he said.

Insurance Observer Reza Ronaldo said that a number of corporate crime cases in the insurance industry were indeed a challenge for the OJK.

Therefore, regulators and law enforcers need to adapt regulations in the midst of increasingly sophisticated technology and digitization as a step to identify and arrest financial crime actors with hidden ownership.

"The case of a lawsuit against the OJK shows the need to improve regulations and law enforcement to provide a stronger deterrent effect. So regulators cannot lose to the regulations," he said.

On the other hand, the insurance industry also needs to improve good corporate governance, not be oriented to get as much profit as possible.

"Let's live with this insurance industry, let's look at it again, let's no longer manipulate information, actuaries if that's more or less," he said.