Legal Protection for Third Parties in Good Faith in Asset Confiscation in Tax Corruption Cases Analysis of Decision No. 95/Pid.Sus-TPK/2021/PN.Smg and Decision No. 265 K/Pid.Sus/2023

Abstract

Asset confiscation in corruption cases is an essential instrument for recovering state financial losses. Nevertheless, its implementation may raise legal problems when the confiscated object is controlled by, or claimed as the legal property of, a bona fide third party. This article examines the legal protection of third parties in the imposition of additional criminal sanctions in the form of asset confidentiality in a tax-related corruption case, based on Decision No. 95/Pid.Sus-TPK/2021/PN.Smg and Supreme Court Decision No. 265 K/Pid.Sus/2023. This research applies normative legal research using statutory, conceptual, and case approaches. The primary legal materials include the Anti-Corruption Law, the Anti-Money Laundering Law, the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia, and Supreme Court Regulation No. 2 of 2022. The findings indicate that asset confusion is justified when a strong causal link and sufficient evidence connect the asset to criminal proceeds. However, when an asset is legally acquired by a third party, the state must provide an effective, simple, and due-process-oriented objection mechanism. A judgment confiscating third-party assets without adequate evidentiary assessment may conflict with legality, legal certainty, proportional justice, and property rights protection. This article recommends strengthening the evidentiary standard concerning asset origin and optimizing third-party objection procedures under Supreme Court Regulation No. 2 of 2022.