<![CDATA[Money laundering constitutes a transnational offense that undermines financial system integrity and economic stability, with predicate offense determination in Indonesia relying on a four-year imprisonment threshold under Article 2(1)(z) of Law Number 8 of 2010, a criterion textually preserved in Article 607 of the new Criminal Code (Law Number 1 of 2023) without substantive re-evaluation. This study aims to examine the normative consistency of this threshold across both regulatory regimes, identify its legal implications for law enforcement effectiveness, and formulate an ideal concept for expanding predicate offense coverage. Employing normative legal research through statute and conceptual approaches, the study analyzes primary and secondary legal materials descriptively and argumentatively. Findings reveal that the threshold's textual continuity conceals unresolved substantive gaps, allowing high-value economic crimes particularly taxation offenses to escape prosecution, weakening corporate criminal liability through the directing mind doctrine, and obstructing asset recovery via the follow the money approach. Comparative analysis with Singapore and Malaysia confirms that Indonesia remains bound to a rigid predicate crime list model. The study concludes that lawmakers should introduce alternative mechanisms based on proceeds' value, strengthen in rem forfeiture instruments independent of predicate offense proof, and expedite passage of the Asset Forfeiture Bill.]]>
Copyrights © 2026
