<![CDATA[Indonesian prosecutors, courts, and secured creditors face an operational hurdle when a single indivisible asset is financed partly by criminal proceeds, partly by lawful funds, and partly by a legitimate secured loan. Uncertainty over whether to forfeit or release the whole object impedes asset recovery and risks arbitrary interference with third-party property rights. This article examines whether existing law provides a mechanism for allocating lawful and tainted value and formulates a rights-compatible proportional forfeiture model. It employs normative legal research using statutory, conceptual, case, and comparative approaches, supported by grammatical, systematic, and teleological interpretation. Existing rules recognize property wholly or partly connected to crime, equivalent-value recovery, seizure limits, and bona fide third-party protection, but recognition of partial criminal origin is not equivalent to an operational allocation mechanism. The article develops a rebuttable, step-by-step framework combining source-of-funds tracing, dual-date independent valuation, separation of secured claims from owner's equity, a tiered evidentiary burden, a creditor good-faith test, and reasoned distribution of enforcement proceeds. This is the first Indonesian model to translate proportionality into a measurable valuation formula for mixed assets while preserving judicial discretion. It enables effective recovery of tainted value and attributable gains without confiscating lawful equity or valid security interests.]]>
