Public Prosecutors' Authority in Asset Seizure: Institutional Challenges to Asset Recovery in Indonesian Corruption Cases
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.63142/al-battar.v3i2.553Keywords:
Asset Recovery, Prosecutorial Authority, Corruption, Asset Seizure, Law EnforcementAbstract
Although Indonesia has strengthened the regulation of corruption crimes, empirical studies on the implementation of the authority of investigating prosecutors in asset confiscation, especially at the regional high prosecutor's office, are still limited. This study aims to analyze the authority of the investigating prosecutor in confiscating assets resulting from corruption at the Gorontalo High Prosecutor's Office and identify factors that hinder its implementation. This study uses a qualitative empirical legal research method with a socio-legal approach. Primary data was obtained through in-depth interviews with prosecutors in the field of special crimes, secondary data was obtained from literature reviews, books, journals and other supporting documents relevant to this research. The results of the study found that although the investigating prosecutor has strong attribution authority to seize corrupt assets, this authority has not been able to produce optimal asset recovery: the 2021–2024 period shows a gap of almost 70% between the total state losses (more than Rp110 billion) and the compensation money that has been successfully recovered (around Rp34 billion). Furthermore, this study found that the biggest obstacle does not come from legal norms, but from weak institutional coordination between the prosecutor's office and related agencies such as banking. These findings confirm that the problem of asset recovery in Indonesia is structural, not just normative. This study recommends strengthening asset forfeiture regulations, improving cross-agency coordination mechanisms, and increasing the technical capacity of investigators.
Downloads
References
Ade Mahmud. Pengembalian Aset Tindak Pidana Korupsi Pendekatan Hukum Progresif. Cetakan Pertama. Jakarta: Sinar Grafika, 2020.
Amalia Syauket and Dwi Seno. Buku Ajar Tindak Pidana Korupsi. Cetakan Pertama. PT. Literasi Nusantara Abadi Grup, 2024.
Ateng Syafrudin. “Menuju Penyelenggaraan Pemerintahan Negara Yang Bersih Dan Bertanggung Jawab.” Jurnal Pro Justitia 4, no. No. 2 (2014).
Bambang Waluyo. Pemberantasan Tindak Pidana Korupsi: Strategi Dan Optimalisasi. Cetakan Pertama. Jakarta: Sinar Grafika, 2016.
Data Bidang Tindak Pidana Khusus Kejaksaan Tinggi Gorontalo. Periode Kasus dan Pemulihan Uang Pengganti Tahun -2021 2024.
González Uriel, Daniel. “Money Laundering, Political Corruption and Asset Recovery in the Spanish Criminal Code.” International Annals of Criminology 59, no. 1 (2021): 38–54. https://doi.org/10.1017/cri.2021.5.
Hasil Observasi Faktual Dan Dokumen Berita Acara Pelaksanaan Eksekusi Riil Bidang Tindak Pidana Khusus Kejaksaan Tinggi Gorontalo. 2026.
Helfer, Laurence R., Cecily Rose, and Rachel Brewster. "Flexible Institution Building in the International Anti-Corruption Regime: Proposing a Transnational Asset Recovery Mechanism." American Journal of International Law 117, no. 4 (2023): 559–600.
Irwansyah. Penelitian Hukum: Pilihan Metode & Praktik Penulisan Artikel. Mirra Buana Media, 2020.
Mamak, K., et al. “Should Gains from Criminal Knowledge Be Forfeited?” Crime, Law and Social Change 77, no. 4 (2022): 437–458. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10611-021-09994-7.
Ochnio, Anna Hanna. "Recent Developments in EU Anti-Corruption Strategy: The Missing Element of the Return of Corrupt Assets to 'Victim Countries'." Journal of Money Laundering Control 27, no. 7 (2024): 1–12.
Olujobi, Olusola Joshua. “Recouping Proceeds of Corruption: Is There Any Need to Reverse Extant Trends by Enacting Civil Forfeiture Legal Regime in Nigeria.” Journal of Money Laundering Control 24, no. 4 (2021): 806–833. https://doi.org/10.1108/JMLC-09-2020-0107.
Pavlidis, Georgios. "Global Sanctions Against Corruption and Asset Recovery: A European Approach." Journal of Money Laundering Control 26, no. 1 (2023): 4–13.
Prajudi Atmosudirjo. Hukum Administrasi Negara. Jakarta: Ghalia Indonesia, 2015.
Rahman, Aspalella A. "An Analysis of the Forfeiture Regime under the Anti-Money Laundering Law." Journal of Money Laundering Control 25, no. 1 (2022): 50–62.
Soerjono Soekanto. Faktor-Faktor Yang Mempengaruhi Penegakan Hukum. Cetakan Kelima. Jakarta: PT RajaGrafindo Persada, 2004.
Trinchera, Tommaso. “Confiscation and Asset Recovery: Better Tools to Fight Bribery and Corruption Crime.” Criminal Law Forum 31, no. 4 (2020): 509–534. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10609-020-09382-1.
Undang-Undang Nomor 20 Tahun 2025 Tentang Kitab Undang-Undang Hukum Acara Pidana. Pasal 118-122.
Undang-Undang Republik Indonesia Nomor 20 Tahun 2025 Tentang Kitab Undang-Undang Hukum Acara Pidana. Pasal 119-122.
Undari Sulung and Mohamad Muspawi. “Memahami Sumber Data Penelitian : Primer, Sekunder, Dan Tersier.” Jurnal Edu Research Indonesian Institute For Corporate Learning And Studies (IICLS) 5, no. no.3 (2024): 112.
Zainuddin Iba and Aditya Wardhana. Metode Penelitian. CV.EUREKA MEDIA AKSARA, 2023.
Zolkaflil, Salwa, Sharifah Nazatul Faiza Syed Mustapha Nazri, and Normah Omar. "Asset Recovery Practices in Combating Money Laundering: Evidence from FATF Mutual Evaluation Report of FATF Member Countries of Asia Pacific Region." Journal of Money Laundering Control 26, no. 1 (2022): 24–34.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Satria Zakaria, Mohamad Rusdiyanto U. Puluhulawa, Karlin Z. Mamu, Norsalwati Mohd Razalli (Author)
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
