Comparison of Asset Confiscation Arrangements for Corruption Crimes Between Indonesia and the United States Which Have Implemented Non-Conviction Based Asset Forfeiture
Keywords:
Asset Confiscation, Corruption, Non-Conviction Based Asset Forfeiture, Indonesia, United StatesAbstract
This research compares the regulation of asset confiscation for criminal acts of corruption between Indonesia and the United States, with a focus on the implementation of the Non-Conviction Based Asset Forfeiture (NCB Asset Forfeiture ). The research method used is normative law with a comparative approach. Using primary and secondary legal materials, this research analyzes the legal framework for asset confiscation in both countries to evaluate its effectiveness. It was found that although Indonesia has statutory regulations regarding asset confiscation, its implementation is still less effective and there are deficiencies in the authority to manage and confiscate assets resulting from corruption. Meanwhile, the United States has implemented the NCB Asset Forfeiture , which allows for the confiscation of assets without criminal penalties, as part of efforts to recover assets lost due to corruption. The research results show significant differences between the two countries in their approach to confiscating assets for criminal acts of corruption. Indonesia needs to strengthen regulations and increase international cooperation for the effectiveness of asset confiscation. Meanwhile, the United States has taken a step forward by implementing the NCB Asset Forfeiture , which provides flexibility in handling assets resulting from corruption. This research highlights the need for improvements in the regulation of asset confiscation for criminal acts of corruption in Indonesia and appreciates the United States' steps in implementing the NCB Asset Forfeiture .
References
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Admin. (nd). Anti-Corruption and Transparency. Website.
Ahmas Arif Hidayat. (2023). Comparison of Confiscation of Assets Without Punishment in Corruption Crimes in Several Countries. Hasanuddin University.
David Fredriek Albert Porajow. (2013). Non-Conviction Based Asset Forfeiture as an Alternative to Regaining State Wealth Lost due to Criminal Acts Related to the State Economy. Faculty of Law.
Easter Lalola, Kurnia Diky, & Anandya. (2022). The Urgency of Arranging Collateral Confiscation in Handling Corruption Crime Cases. Indonesia Corruption Watch.
Eni Marhaenningsih. (nd). Condition of Corruption in Indonesia. Financial and Development Supervisory Agency.
Helmi. 2018. Non-Conviction Based Asset Forfeiture in the Law on the Eradication of Corruption Crimes in the Future as an Alternative Effort to Return Assets . Airlangga University. Thesis.
I Wayan Patriana. (2002). International Treaty Law (1st ed.). Mandar Forward.
Jean-Pierre Brun. (2011). Asset Recovery Handbook (A Guide for Practitioners). The World Bank. Kansil. (2002). Introduction to Legal Science. Library Hall.
Criminal Code, Pub. L.No. 10, 10 (2021). Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, Pub. L.No. 2 (1969).
Merle, J.C. 2013. "Global Challenges to Liberal Democracy". Spheres of Global Justice , 1(812). Mohammad Zamroni. (2011). Progressive Evidence: Implementation of the Upper Reverse Evidence Principle
Corruption Crime Progressive Review: Verification of reverse principle implementation (reversed onus) against corruption. Indonesian Legislation Journal, 8(2), 82.
Nugraha , National Law Magazine , 49.
Office on Drugs and Crime. (nd).
Https://Www.Unodc.Org/Unodc/En/Corruption/COSP/Conference-of-the- Statesparties.Html.
Ramelan, P. (2012). Mathematical Communication and Interactive Learning Skills. Journal of Mathematics Education, 1(1), 77–82.
Risca Aulia Zahra. (2018). Juridical Review Regarding Confiscation of Assets Proceeding from Corruption Crimes According to Non Conviction Based (Ncb) Asset Forfeiture in the Indonesian Positive Law Perspective. Faculty of Law.
Signature and Ratification Status. (2023, October 10).
Https://Www.Unodc.Org/Unodc/En/Corruption/Ratification-Status.Html.
Sudarto. (2017). Asset Confiscation Mechanism Using Non-Conviction Based Asset Forfeiture as an Effort to Recover State Losses due to Corruption Crimes. Graduate Law Journal, 5(1), 115.
Suseno FM. (2016). Karl Marx's Thoughts; From Utopian Socialism to Disputing Revisionism (10th ed.). PT Gramedia Pustaka Utama.
The FBI addresses global fraud against the US government and the corruption of federal public officials outside the continental United States. (nd). International Corruption.
Theresia Ngutra. (2016). Law and Legal Sources. Journal of Thought, Social Sciences, Law and Teaching, 11(2), 194.
Uncac. (2023). Signature and Ratification Status.
Law Number 20 of 2001 concerning the Eradication of Corruption Crimes, Pub. L.No. 18 (2001).
Law Number 20 of 2001 concerning the Eradication of Corruption Crimes., Pub.
L.No. 20 (2001).
Law Number 20 of 2001 concerning the Eradication of Corruption Crimes., Pub.
L.No. 20 (2001).
Law Number 20 of 2001 concerning the Eradication of Corruption Crimes, Pub. L.No. 20 (2001).
Law Number 20 of 2001 concerning the Eradication of Corruption Crimes., Pub.
L.No. 20 (2001).
Law Number 7 of 2006 concerning Ratification of the United Nations Convention Against Corruption (UNCAC), Pub. L.No. 7 (2006).
United Nations Convention Against Corruption, Pub. L.No. 66 paragraph (2) (2005).
Vettori B. (2006). Tough on Criminal Welath: Exploring the Practice of Proceeds from Crime Confiscation in the EU. Springer.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Conference Proceedings Volume
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2024 Daud tarigan, Ismaidar
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
