Konstruksi Konstitusional Non-Conviction-Based Asset Forfeiture dalam RUU Perampasan Aset Indonesia
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
Non-Conviction Based Asset Forfeiture (NCBAF) dalam RUU Perampasan Aset penting untuk pemulihan kerugian negara akibat korupsi, tetapi menimbulkan persoalan yuridis terkait batas kewenangan negara, nexus antara aset dan tindak pidana, standar pembuktian, due process of law, kontrol yudisial, perlindungan pihak ketiga beritikad baik, dan proporsionalitas pembatasan hak milik. Penelitian hukum normatif ini menggunakan pendekatan perundang-undangan, konseptual, kasus, dan perbandingan untuk menganalisis konstruksi konstitusional NCBAF serta merumuskan pengamanannya. Hasilnya menunjukkan bahwa legitimasi NCBAF tidak cukup bertumpu pada tujuan pemulihan aset, melainkan harus melalui pengujian konstitusional berjenjang. Penelitian ini menawarkan Sequential Constitutional Control dengan lima constitutional gates: legalitas; nexus dan standar pembuktian; due process, kontrol yudisial, keberatan, dan remediasi; perlindungan bona fide third party; serta proporsionalitas. Konstruksi ini menjaga efektivitas pemulihan aset tetap dalam koridor negara hukum, kepastian hukum, dan perlindungan hak milik.
Article Details
Section
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
References
Aldin, Mpesau, A., Dagani, G., Ruslan, & Rosidin, A. (2026). Peredaran Narkotika Tanpa Kontak Langsung: Studi Kriminologis Terhadap Modus “Menempel” Dikawasan Lorong Jati Kota Kendari. Jurnal Hukum Lex Generalis, 7(12).
Alexy, R. (2015). Robert Alexy, Constitutional Rights, Democracy, and Representation. Journal of Legal Philosophy, 1, 23–36. https://doi.org/https://www.rivisteweb.it/doi/10.4477/79700
Andini, O. G., Boer, M. R. K., Tanjung, S. A., & Odelia, M. (2025). Human Rights Protection for the Third-Party in Non-Conviction Based Asset Forfeiture: A Comparison of Indonesia and Australia. Journal of International Law, 6(2), 240–259. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.22437/up.v6i2.41117
Ayuningsih, I. R., & Nelson, F. M. (2022). Perampasan Aset Tanpa Pemidanaan dalam Perspektif Hukum Responsif. Jurnal Ius Constituendum, 7(2), 246–261. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.26623/jic.v7i2.5142
Azizah, H., Mulyadi, M., Syahrin, A., & Marlina, M. (2026). Guarding Property, Recovering Assets: A Constitutional Court Perspective on Non-Conviction-Based Asset Forfeiture in Indonesia. Jurnal Konstitusi, 23(2), 337–372. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.31078/jk2326
Badan Keahlian DPR RI, Pusat Analisis dan Anggaran dan Akuntabilitas Keuangan Negara. (2024). (n.d.).
BENNIS v. MICHIGAN (1996).
Borlini, L., & Rose, C. (2024). The normative development of laws on asset preservation and confiscation: An examination of emerging best practices. International Journal of Constitutional Law, 22(2), 514–537. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1093/icon/moae036
Boucht, J. (2019). Asset confiscation in Europe – past, present, and future challenges Available to Purchase. Journal of Financial Crime, 26(2), 526–548. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1108/JFC-04-2018-0043
Cassella, S. D. (2022). Asset Forfeiture Law in the United States - Third Edition. Juris Publishing.
Co, Calero-Toledo v. Pearson Yacht Leasing (1974).
Criminal Finances Act (2017).
DIRECTIVE (EU) 2024/1260 OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL of 24 April 2024 on Asset Recovery and Confiscation (2024).
Directive 2014/42/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 3 April 2014 on the Freezing and Confiscation of Instrumentalities and Proceeds of Crime in the European Union (2014).
Economic Crime (Transparency and Enforcement) Act (2022).
Economic Crime and Corporate Transparency Act (2023).
Felicia, F. (2022). Kedudukan Mahkamah Konstitusi Dalam Sistem Hukum Ketatanegaraan Indonesia. Jurnal Indonesia Sosial Teknologi, 3(5), 574–585. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.59141/jist.v3i05.422
Fuadi, G., Putri, W. V., & Raharjo, T. (2024). Tinjauan Perampasan Aset dalam Tindak Pidana Pencucian Uang dari Perspektif Keadilan. Jurnal Penegakan Hukum Dan Keadilan, 5(1). https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.18196/jphk.v5i1.19163
Greenberg, T. S., Samuel, L. M., Grant, W., & Gray, L. (2009). NON-CONVICTION BASED ASSET FORFEITURE. The Word Bank.
Hafid, I. (2021). Perampasan Aset Tanpa Pemidanaan Dalam Perspektif Economic Analysis Of Law. Lex Renaissan, 6(1), 465–480. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.20885/JLR.vol6.iss3.art3
Hiariej, E. O. S. (2019). UNITED NATIONS CONVENTION AGAINST CORRUPTION DALAM SISTEM HUKUM INDONESIA. JURNAL MIMBAR HUKUM, 31(1), 112–125. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.22146/jmh.43968
Hryniewicz-Lach, E. (2024). Improving asset confiscation : in the quest for effective and just solutions. Era Forum, 01114(2020), 231–247. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12027-024-00806-8
Indonesia, D. P. R. (n.d.). Paripurna Tetapkan RUU Perampasan Aset Masuk Bersama 51 RUU Prioritas Prolegnas 2025-2026 Lainnya. Https://Www.Dpr.Go.Id/Kegiatan-Dpr/Berita/Paripurna-Tetapkan-RUU-Perampasan-Aset-Masuk-Bersama-51-RUU-Prioritas-Prolegnas-2025-2026-Lainnya-59616.
Isra, S. (2014). Peran Mahkamah Konstitusi dalam Penguatan Hak Asasi Manusia Di Indonesia. Jurnal Konstitusi, 11(3), 409–427. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.31078/jk1131.
Korupsi, K. P. (2024). Kinerja 2020-2024: KPK Kembalikan Kerugian Negara Senilai Rp2,5 Triliun. Kpk.Go.Id. https://doi.org/https://kpk.go.id/id/ruang-informasi/berita/kinerja-2020-2024-kpk-kembalikan-kerugian-negara-senilai-rp25-triliun
Legislative Decree no 159 / 2011 ( Italy ). (2026). 2011(159), 5623.
Mahkamah Konstitusi Republik Indonesia. Putusan Nomor 25/PUU-XIV/2016. (n.d.).
Mahkamah Konstitusi Republik Indonesia. Putusan Nomor 90/PUU-XIII/2015. (n.d.).
Panzavolta, M. (2018). Confiscating Dirty Assets: The Italian Experience. In C. King, Walker, Clive, & J. Gurulé (Eds.), The Palgrave Handbook of Criminal and Terrorism Financing Law (pp. 491–514). Springer International Publishing.
Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 (2002).
Rugian, I. A. (2021). Prinsip Proporsionalitas dalam Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi (Studi Perbandingan di Indonesia dan Jerman). Jurnal Konstitusi, 18(2), 461–479. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.31078/jk1829.
Solum, L. B., & Crema, M. (2022). The Original Meaning of “Due Process of Law” in the Fifth Amendment. Virginia Law Review, 108(447), 89.
STATES, A. v. U. (1993). certiorari to the united states court of appeals for the eighth circuit. Justia, 881(4), 606–611.
Sudarto, Purwadi, H., & Hartriwiningsih. (2017). 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). https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.20961/hpe.v5i1.18352
Trinchera, T. (2025). Fighting Crime in Non-Criminal Proceedings: A Comparative Study of American Civil Forfeiture and Italian Preventive Confiscation. The American Journal of Comparative Law, 73(3), 579–625. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1093/ajcl/avaf027
United Nations Convention against Corruption (2018).
United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime. (2019). Thirteenth session Open-ended Intergovernmental Working Group on Asset Recovery.
United States v. Bajakajian (1998).
United States v. Ursery (1996).
Wiwoho, S. H. (2024). Acceleration of Legal Reformulation Regarding Non-Conviction Based Asset Forfeiture in Indonesia. Pena Justisia, 23(2). https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.31941/pj.v23i3.4783
Wulandari, Suprayitno, W., Kurniawan, K. D., & Borsa, M. Ö. (2023). Asset Forfeiture of Corruption Proceeds Using the Non-Conviction Based Asset Forfeiture Method: A Review of Human Rights. Ndonesia Law Reform Journal, 3(1), 15–25. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.22219/ilrej.v3i1.24496