Asset forfeiture bill debate narrows to wording, seizure test

The Asset Forfeiture Bill debate has produced two new proposals: a change in terminology and a mechanism to review seizures before the main case goes to trial. Yehezkiel Minggus Tiranda, a law professor at Unissula Semarang, said the term “asset recovery” is more appropriate because it is more restorative and closer to the concept of asset recovery in the United Nations Convention Against Corruption. He also warned that the transitional and closing provisions need to be drafted carefully so they are not easily challenged at the Mahkamah Konstitusi. In the DPR, Komisi III member Nasyirul Falah Amru proposed that judicial review of seizure or forfeiture actions before the main hearing should not use KUHAP pretrial procedures, but rather a special “pra judicial” mechanism in the bill. He said the review must cover formal and substantive requirements, be time-limited, and clarify whether the ruling is final or can still be challenged in the Mahkamah Agung.