ASSET FORFEITURE ARRANGEMENTS FOR CORRUPTION PERPETRATORS TO RECOVER STATE LOSSES

Lenny Marta Baringbing; Setiawan Noerdajasakti; Yuliati Yuliati

doi:10.31435/ijite.2(54).2026.5486

Authors

Lenny Marta Baringbing Universitas Brawijaya, Indonesia
Setiawan Noerdajasakti Universitas Brawijaya, Indonesia
Yuliati Yuliati Universitas Brawijaya, Indonesia

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.31435/ijite.2(54).2026.5486

Keywords:

Corruption, Asset Forfeiture, Non-Conviction Based, State Loss Recovery, Asset Recovery

Abstract

Corruption, as an exceptional crime, results in enormous state financial losses and obstructs national development. Indonesia’s asset forfeiture regime, however, remains anchored in a conviction-based model that presupposes a final, binding criminal judgment which is a precondition that significantly undermines effective asset recovery. Addressing this gap, the current research aims to critically evaluate the performance of existing loss-recovery instruments and to propose an optimal regulatory design for non-conviction based (NCB) asset forfeiture in Indonesia. Methodologically, this is a normative legal study incorporating statutory, conceptual, and comparative approaches. Legal materials including primary, secondary, and tertiary are examined qualitatively using a descriptive-analytical framework. The findings indicate that the existing asset forfeiture mechanism still faces various obstacles, including dependence on criminal prosecution, limited scope of forfeitable objects, weak inter-agency coordination, and a suboptimal asset tracing system. Moreover, the proportion of state losses actually recovered continues to lag significantly behind the aggregate losses incurred. Evidence drawn from comparative analysis with the United States and the United Kingdom indicates that the NCB model yields superior effectiveness by virtue of its in rem orientation which targeting the assets directly and its elimination of any prerequisite for securing a criminal conviction against the offender. Therefore, a reconstruction of Indonesia’s legal system is needed through the establishment of specific regulations governing asset forfeiture without criminal conviction, strengthening of asset management institutions, enhancement of international cooperation, and optimization of technology in asset tracing. Accordingly, the implementation of NCB is expected to improve the effectiveness of state loss recovery and strengthen the corruption eradication system in Indonesia.

References

Abdulahanaa. (2018). Mengatasi korupsi dengan asas pembuktian terbalik: Mewujudkan tuntutan keadilan hukum muamalah. Trush Media Publishing.

Abdullah, F., & Eddy, T. (2021). Perampasan aset hasil tindak pidana korupsi tanpa pemidanaan (non-conviction based asset forfeiture) berdasarkan hukum Indonesia dan United Nations Convention Against Corruption (UNCAC) 2003. Jurnal Ilmiah Advokasi, 9(1), 19–30.

Adji, I. S. (2009). Korupsi dan penegakan hukum. Diadit Media.

Adji, O. S. (1985). Hukum pidana: Pengembangan. Erlangga.

Ali, A. (2002). Menguak tabir hukum: Suatu kajian filosofis dan sosiologis. Gunung Agung.

Atmasasmita, R. (2004). Sekitar masalah korupsi: Aspek nasional dan aspek internasional. Mandar Maju.

Atmasasmita, R. (2012). Teori hukum integratif: Rekonstruksi terhadap teori hukum pembangunan dan teori hukum progresif. Genta Publishing.

Bostwick, L., Bartlett, N., Cronje, H., & Abernathy, T. J., III. (2024). Managing seized and confiscated assets: A guide for practitioners. World Bank Publications.

Cassella, S. D. (2006). Recovering the proceeds of crime from the correspondent account of a foreign bank. Journal of Money Laundering Control, 9(4), 401–415.

Diantha, I. M. P. (2016). Metodologi penelitian hukum normatif dalam justifikasi teori hukum. Prenada Media.

Djulaeka, S. H., & Rahayu, D. (2020). Buku ajar: Metode penelitian hukum. Scopindo Media Pustaka.

Gultom, P. (2022). Analisis sosiologi hukum terhadap kemungkinan dapat diterapkannya restorative justice dalam perkara tindak pidana korupsi di Indonesia. Jurnal Hukum dan Kemasyarakatan Al-Hikmah, 3(1), 154–178.

Hauert, S. A. (1994). An examination of the nature, scope, and extent of statutory civil forfeiture. University of Dayton Law Review, 20, 159.

Husein, Y. (2007). Bunga rampai anti pencucian uang. Book Terrace & Library.

Husein, Y. (2019). Penjelasan hukum tentang perampasan aset tanpa pemidanaan dalam perkara tindak pidana korupsi. Pusat Studi dan Kebijakan Hukum Indonesia; Pusat Penelitian dan Pengembangan Hukum dan Peradilan Mahkamah Agung Republik Indonesia.

Ibrahim, J. (2006). Teori dan metodologi penelitian hukum normatif. Bayumedia Publishing.

Kennedy, A. (2006). Designing a civil forfeiture system: An issues list for policymakers and legislators. Journal of Financial Crime, 13(2), 132–163. https://doi.org/10.1108/13590790610660863

Kusnadi, K. (2020). Kebijakan formulasi ketentuan pengembalian aset hasil tindak pidana korupsi. Corruptio, 1(2), 105–116.

Manumpahi, R. B. (2021). Pengembalian barang bukti dalam penyelesaian perkara pidana berdasarkan KUHAP. Lex Crimen, 10(5), 199–208.

Marzuki, M. (2017). Penelitian hukum: Edisi revisi. Prenada Media.

Moeljatno, S. H. (2002). Asas-asas hukum pidana. Rineka Cipta.

Muhammad, Y. (2013). Merampas aset koruptor: Solusi pemberantasan korupsi di Indonesia. Kompas.

Mukminah, L. S. (2020). Perampasan aset hasil tindak pidana korupsi secara perdata. PT Literasi Nusantara Abadi Grup.

Muladi, & Arief, B. N. (1984). Teori-teori dan kebijakan pidana. Alumni.

Mulyadi, L. (2015). Tindak pidana korupsi di Indonesia: Normatif, teoretis, praktik, dan masalahnya. Alumni.

Purnama, E. (2007). Negara kedaulatan rakyat: Analisis terhadap sistem pemerintahan Indonesia dan perbandingannya dengan negara lain. Bandung.

Putra, D. A. K., & Prahassacitta, V. (2021). Tinjauan atas kriminalisasi illicit enrichment dalam tindak pidana korupsi di Indonesia: Studi perbandingan dengan Australia. Indonesia Criminal Law Review, 1(1), 43–59.

Ramelan, D. (2013). Naskah akademik rancangan undang-undang tentang perampasan aset tindak pidana. Badan Pembinaan Hukum Nasional, Kementerian Hukum dan Hak Asasi Manusia.

Reuter, P. (2005). Chasing dirty money: The fight against money laundering. Peterson Institute.

Saputra, R. (2017). Tantangan penerapan perampasan aset tanpa tuntutan pidana (non-conviction based asset forfeiture) dalam RUU Perampasan Aset di Indonesia. Integritas: Jurnal Antikorupsi, 3(1), 115–130.

Setiawan, P. J. (2019). Sistem beban pembuktian dinamis (dynamic burden of proof): Paradigma kebijakan kriminal dan hak asasi manusia. Jurnal Majelis: Media Aspirasi Konstitusi, 2, 99–118.

Shinta, N. (2025). Analysis of Bank Syariah Indonesia (BSI) customer data hacking using empirical theory. International Review of Social and Cultural Studies, 1(1), 6–11. https://doi.org/10.66324/irscs.v1i1.43

Sibero, S. M. T., Kristiawanto, K., & Ismed, M. (2024). Criminal law enforcement in efforts to eradicate money laundering in Indonesia. Policy, Law, Notary and Regulatory Issues, 3(4), 467–471. https://doi.org/10.55047/polri.v3i4.1461

Siburian, L. S., & Amalia, R. (2025). Perampasan aset hasil tindak pidana korupsi secara perdata. Innovative: Journal of Social Science Research, 5(3), 4016–4029. https://doi.org/10.31004/innovative.v5i3.19311

Soekanto, S. (2007). Penelitian hukum normatif: Suatu tinjauan singkat.

Sudarto, Purwadi, H., & Hartriwiningsih. (2016). Mekanisme perampasan aset dengan menggunakan non-conviction based asset forfeiture sebagai upaya pengembalian kerugian negara akibat tindak pidana korupsi. Jurnal Hukum dan Pembangunan Ekonomi, 5(1), 109–118. https://doi.org/10.20961/hpe.v5i1.18352

Sunggono, B. (2003). Metodologi penelitian hukum. PT RajaGrafindo Persada.

Tahir, R., Astawa, I. G. P., Widjajanto, A., Panggabean, M. L., Rohman, M. M., Dewi, N. P. P., Deliarnoor, N. A., Abas, M., Ayu, R. F., & Meinarni, N. P. S. (2023). Metodologi penelitian bidang hukum: Suatu pendekatan teori dan praktik. PT Sonpedia Publishing Indonesia.

Zebua, F. R. P., Jauhari, I., & Siregar, T. (2008). Tanggung jawab pelaku tindak pidana korupsi dan ahli warisnya dalam pembayaran uang pengganti kerugian keuangan negara ditinjau dari aspek hukum perdata: Studi kasus pada Pengadilan Negeri Medan. Jurnal Mercatoria, 1(2), 150–162.