CORRUPTION, ASSET RECOVERY AND PUBLIC TRUST: POLICY DESIGN BEYOND CRIMINAL PUNISHMENT

Abstract

Indonesian anti-corruption policy has been built primarily around criminal punishment, yet recovery of the proceeds of corruption has remained a small fraction of established state losses, which suggests that the design privileges retribution over restitution. This study aims to analyse the structural limits of a conviction-centred model, to examine non-conviction based forfeiture as a policy alternative together with its due process risks, and to assess the contribution of Islamic legal doctrine on misappropriated public property to the design of recovery policy. The research applies normative juridical research with statutory, conceptual, case and comparative approaches, supported by a reading of the doctrines of ghulūl, khiyāna and the restitution of unlawfully acquired property, drawing on Indonesian anti-corruption and anti-money laundering legislation, the United Nations Convention against Corruption, and comparative forfeiture regimes. The findings show that recovery fails at three points: liability is attached to persons while assets are held by entities and relatives, the burden of tracing rests on an under-resourced prosecution, and the death or absence of the accused terminates the proceeding together with the claim to the assets. Islamic doctrine treats misappropriated public property as recoverable independently of punishment. The study recommends a statutory in rem forfeiture mechanism with judicial authorisation, evidentiary safeguards and third-party protections.