Legal observer from Airlangga University Hardjuno Wiwoho said the lawsuit to test the Government Regulation in Lieu of Law Number 49 of 1960 concerning the State Receivables Affairs Committee (Perpu PUPN) could be a learning material in preparing the Draft Law (RUU) on Asset Confiscation.
Because, he said, the lawsuit filed with the Constitutional Court (MK) could be an initial reflection to test the extent to which the Indonesian legal system is able to distinguish between efforts to save state finances and the potential for abuse of power.
"I think the lawsuit on the PUPN Perpu needs to be looked into. Moreover, the government and the DPR are discussing the Asset Confiscation Bill which also gives great authority to the government," Hardjuno said in a written statement.
Observing the minutes of the last Constitutional Court hearing last week, Hardjuno said the main issue of the lawsuit was the weak supervision of the process of determining government obligors, including the issue of documents and accounts that were allegedly invalid.
He assessed that if it is true that there is a copy of the Supreme Court (MA) decision that is used as the basis for the bill, but is then suspected of being fake and used by the government to seize citizens' rights, then this condition is a serious problem in the context of legal certainty.
Likewise, he continued, if it is true that funds were transferred to a bank account that is suspected of not belonging to the party being charged. This is considered to show the urgency of improving the legal system in Indonesia before the Asset Confiscation Bill is passed.
Hardjuno also emphasized that the government needs strong legal instruments to confiscate assets resulting from crime, but this must not sacrifice the principles of justice and judicial accountability.
