Chairman of Commission III of the DPR RI, Habiburokhman.
progresifjaya.co.id, JAKARTA – The implementation of the Asset Forfeiture Law must not be carried out arbitrarily. The regulation requires robust oversight mechanisms to prevent it from being misused as a tool of political power.
A key concern arising among the public is that the scope of asset forfeiture extends beyond just corruption offenses.
This point was emphasized by the Chairman of Commission III of the House of Representatives (DPR RI), Habiburokhman, speaking to the media on Monday, August 31, 2026.
“In recent days, we have received a lot of feedback regarding the fact that the Asset Forfeiture Law applies to more than just corruption offenses,” he explained.
According to him, there are 13 types of criminal offenses proposed to be subject to asset forfeiture. These include corruption narcotics and psychotropics, terrorism, human smuggling, the smuggling of weapons, ammunition, and hazardous materials, forestry, environmental offenses, taxation, banking, insurance, mining, and marine and fisheries offenses.
Additionally, asset forfeiture has been proposed to apply to human trafficking offenses.
This expanded scope has raised concerns that ordinary citizens could become targets of asset forfeiture, even if they are not public officials or perpetrators of corruption.
“Many parties are concerned that ordinary citizens could face asset forfeiture despite not holding public office. Basuki Tjahaja Purnama even expressed concern that the Asset Forfeiture Law could be used as a tool to bolster the state budget by seizing the assets of citizens with tax issues,” he stated.
Habiburokhman further added, that the application of the law must adhere to the principle of equality before the law. Anyone who violates the law must face sanctions, regardless of their position or background.
“Furthermore, the provisions for asset forfeiture—extending beyond just corruption cases—bear similarities to the systems in place in the UK, the United States, and several other countries,” he said.
However, he emphasized, that the expansion of asset forfeiture powers must be accompanied by robust oversight mechanisms. He does not want the regulations to be used to pressure the public or serve specific political interests.
“What must not happen is the arbitrary enforcement of asset forfeiture against the public. We must not let the Asset Forfeiture Law become a tool for those in power to extort citizens, criminalize political opponents, or silence critics,” he explained.
Currently, he added, Commission III of the DPR is seeking a formula to strengthen oversight regarding the implementation of the Asset Forfeiture Law.
“There must be a strong institution capable of taking action against corrupt law enforcement officers who abuse their power during the asset forfeiture process,” said Habiburokhman.
“And there must be ethical, professional, and criminal sanctions for such corrupt officers. In short, the implementation of the Asset Forfeiture Law requires law enforcement officials who are clean and possess integrity,” he continued. (Bembo)
