<![CDATA[Corruption can damage public finances, undermine institutional trust, and impair public services. In Islamic criminal law, however, corruption does not correspond automatically to a single classical offence; its legal characterization depends on the conduct, the property involved, and how it was obtained. This article examines the possible use of ta‘zīr against exceptionally harmful corruption and the limits of asset confiscation through Maqāṣid al-Sharī‘ah. It employs normative legal research and library-based analysis of Islamic legal concepts, Indonesian legislation, judicial decisions, and relevant scholarship. The analysis indicates that ghulūl, bribery, misappropriation, and unlawful appropriation may illuminate different forms of corruption, but should not be treated as interchangeable categories or as automatic grounds for applying ḥudūd penalties. The death penalty as ta‘zīr requires a separate, carefully evidenced argument; seriousness of the offence or a general appeal to public welfare is insufficient by itself. Asset recovery must distinguish proven proceeds of crime and compensation for established losses from lawfully acquired property unrelated to the offence. The analysis also notes that the National Criminal Code (Law No. 1 of 2023) has been in force since 2 January 2026, so the applicable provisions depend on the time of the offence. The article proposes assessing severe sanctions through legality, evidentiary safeguards, proportionality, protection of property, and public welfare. The positive-law discussion distinguishes the statutory conditions for a death sentence from a concrete first-instance judgment on replacement money; neither is presented as a corruption conviction imposing the death penalty]]>
