Paper Contents
Abstract
AbstractThe point of this study is to look into how extra criminal money substitutes can be used in corruption and come up with the best way to use them so that state asset recovery works better. Corruption, as an extraordinary crime, requires a comprehensive legal approach, including a strategy of financial recovery for the state through additional criminal mechanisms. The current regulation still faces challenges in implementation, especially related to the effectiveness of the seizure and return of assets resulting from corruption crimes. This research uses a normative legal methods with a legislation approach, a theory approach, a comparative law approach, and a conceptual approach. The data sources used consist of primary, secondary, and tertiary legal materials that are analyzed qualitatively with descriptive analysis techniques to understand the application of applicable laws and explore solutions to the obstacles faced in the implementation of additional money substitutes. The results showed that, although the provision of additional criminal money substitutes has been regulated by the Corruption Eradication Act, its implementation is still not effective due to various legal and technical constraints. To increase its effectiveness, it is necessary to strengthen regulation through the application of the theory of reversal of the burden of proof, the ratification of the draft law on asset seizure, and the harmonization of asset recovery mechanisms with international legal standards, such as UNCAC. In addition, the synergy between law enforcement agencies must be strengthened in order to maximize the process of tracing, freezing, confiscating, and recovering assets resulting from corruption.Keywords: Additional Criminal, Money Replacement, Asset Recovery
Copyright
Copyright © 2025 Ramli Usman. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License.
