The Government In Lieu Of The Law (Perpu) Can Actually Be A Solution

Illustration Of Photos Of Luthfiah VOI

JAKARTA - The Bill (RUU) on Asset Confiscation is in the spotlight. This regulation is expected to be a powerful weapon in eradicating corruption in Indonesia. However, until now, the discussion is still adrift. What exactly is the content of this bill and why is its ratification so slow?

What Is The Asset Confiscation Bill?

The Criminal Asset Confiscation Bill, as stated on the Jdih.ppatk.go.id page, defines confiscation of assets as state action to take over ownership of assets resulting from crime based on a court decision with permanent legal force, without the need for punishment of the perpetrators.

Based on Article 5 paragraph (1) assets that can be confiscated include:

In addition, assets that are not balanced with income and cannot be proven whose origins are also included in the category that can be confiscated.

This bill also stipulates that assets that can be confiscated are worth at least Rp. 100 million and related to criminal acts that are threatened with a sentence of four years in prison or more. Confiscation of assets can be done if the suspect dies, escapes, permanent illness, or is unknown. In addition, if the defendant is declared free from any lawsuits or criminal cases cannot be tried, his assets can still be confiscated.

Some Are Threatened, Such As Taking Their Own Neck

The Executive Director of the Segara Research Institute, Piter Abdullah Redjalam, assessed that the slow discussion of the Asset Confiscation Bill could be caused by those who feel threatened by the regulation. He suspects that there is a conflict of interest behind the tug-of-war of regulations that should be a powerful weapon in eradicating corruption in Indonesia.

"Hopefully it will be ratified as a law soon. The slow ratification, it could be for them to become the master's weapon. It's like slitting their own throat. Actually, the bill aims to return state assets. It can create a deterrent effect," said Piter Abdullah.

According to Piter Abdullah, it is very rare in Indonesia to have an angel-hearted man. Without strict rules regarding the confiscation of assets resulting from corruption, the state will continue to experience financial leaks. Meanwhile, corruptors can still enjoy the results of their crimes. According to Piter, the law on the eradication of assets is likely to only be carried out by previously conducting the National Amnesty.

The Terbeskalasi Asset Confiscation Bill, ICW: The Government Previously Impressed With Responsibility To The DPR

Indonesia Corruption Watch (ICW) researcher Erma Nuzulia Syifa assesses that the government has no strong commitment to suppressing corruption. One proof is the slow discussion of the Asset Confiscation Bill (RUU), which can actually be an important tool to return state losses.

"This bill has long been aspired to, both by the previous and current government. However, instead of accelerating the discussion, what was published was the BUMN Law, which until now has not been accessed by the public," said Erma.

According to ICW, the slow process is not only the fault of the DPR, but also the President. In the previous administration, President Jokowi seemed to throw responsibility on the DPR, even though it should have been able to encourage discussion and approval. Meanwhile, in the current era of Prabowo Subianto's administration, this push was not even heard at all.

In the context of legislation, Government Regulation in Lieu of Law (Perpu) can actually be a solution. Based on Law no. 12 of 2011, Perpu can be issued in a precarious state. However, the decision to issue it completely depends on the President's political will.

"Is the slowness of this bill quite considered a spark so it must be taken over through the Perpu? It returns to the President's courage," said Erma.

The Asset Confiscation Bill is considered important to cover state financial leaks due to corruption. Currently, the Corruption Crime Law (UU Tipikor) has indeed allowed law enforcement to sue perpetrators of corruption civilly. However, the process is constrained by inadequate procedural law.

"In the paradigm of punishment it can take years, not to mention the execution of decisions that have to wait for the inkracht. Thus, the return of state financial losses in corruption cases is relatively long," he explained.

The Prosecutor's Office Firmly Welcomes the Asset Confiscation Bill

The Attorney General's Office (AGO) has confirmed its commitment to return state losses as a result of the disclosure of corruption and the Crime of Money Laundering (TPPU). The Asset Confiscation Bill is considered to further strengthen these efforts, "Yes, we are proof that now there is an Asset Recovery Agency. Yes, that's clear. We have an Asset Recovery Agency, meaning that it can be described. What is our commitment. Our commitment is very strong," said the Head of the Attorney General's Office, Harli Siregar at the AGO, South Jakarta.

"Yes, if it can be used as law, I think it will be stronger, right," he continued.

The AGO admits that it is still running to return state money even though the Asset Confiscation Bill has not yet become a law. However, the AGO's Asset Recovery Agency (BPA) carries out its duties and functions in order to save state finances.

"Yes, I think it will continue, meaning how the government policies are, but so far we have been running. This is proof (referring to the corruption case of sugar and pertamina impiration), we are trying to return state money," said Harli.