Originally published in Hukumonline, 26 March 2026.
This page is a summary by AZ. The full column stays on Hukumonline.
In this article · 4 points
Sebelum mulai proses pembahasan RUU PA, penting bagi para perumus kebijakan mencermati dan memperkuat konsep perampasan aset yang akan dirumuskan dalam undang-undang dengan memperhatikan standar pengaturan konsep-konsep dasar agar menjadi mekanisme efektif alih-alih membuka penerapan serampangan, sewenang-wenang, dan kontraproduktif dalam penegakan hukum.
The Asset Forfeiture Bill (RUU Perampasan Aset) entered the legislative priority list in February 2026. In their column, Iftitahsari and Ichsan Zikry set out the basic concepts the bill needs to regulate, so that forfeiture without a criminal conviction works as an effective mechanism and does not become arbitrary.
01
A civil mechanism that still needs criminal-law standards
Forfeiture acts in rem, against the asset, yet should meet criminal-law standards.
02
Limited to crimes with large economic gain
The authors propose limiting forfeiture to offences that generate substantial economic proceeds.
03
Clear grounds for when criminal proceedings cannot continue
Death, flight, permanent illness, unknown whereabouts or lapse should be named explicitly.
04
Procedural definitions in place of vague terms
Replace “perkara yang tidak dapat dilanjutkan” with clear procedural definitions.
