<![CDATA[Corruption as a global problem threatens Indonesia's economic and social stability, with trillions of rupiah in financial losses to the state and a decline in public trust. Asset forfeiture as an additional sanction in criminal corruption cases is regulated to recover losses, but faces challenges such as weak coordination and proving the origin of assets. This study analyzes the following issues: 1) How is the asset forfeiture mechanism applied in the process of enforcing corruption crimes to recover state financial losses? 2) How is the asset forfeiture mechanism applied in the process of enforcing corruption crimes to recover state financial losses? The research method uses a normative juridical approach through literature study and qualitative descriptive analysis. There is a research gap, namely the gap between the available legal regulations (such as Article 18 of Law No. 31/1999 and Article 38 of the Criminal Code). The results of the study show that asset forfeiture is regulated in the Anti-Corruption Law and the Anti-Money Laundering Law as a mandatory sanction under certain conditions, with mechanisms including seizure, judicial/non-judicial forfeiture, and restitution, although its effectiveness is hampered by the complexity of evidence and cross-border asset transfers, thus requiring regulatory strengthening and international harmonization.]]>
Copyrights © 2026
