Eligibility Of Real Estate For Seizing In Order To Pay Compensation For State Losses In Corrupt Practices

Abstract

The purpose of this study is to determine how legal protection is provided for the defendant's property used as evidence in corruption trials from the perspective of Pancasila justice. The research method used is normative jurisprudence. The research findings indicate that to support efforts to eradicate corruption, during the investigation process up to the trial, the defendant's assets, including those derived from corruption and other assets not obtained through corruption and unrelated to the crime of corruption, are often seized through the mechanism of confiscation, which will later be used to pay the compensation imposed on the defendant. The conclusion of this study is that the principle of presenting evidence in court is to support the proof of the Defendant's actions, not to serve as a guarantee for the execution of the sentence. Therefore, the Defendant's property that is not related to and is not the result of the corruption offence cannot be used as evidence in the trial process. The Constitution provides guarantees and protection for private property, as stated in the 1945 Constitution Article 28H paragraph (4), which states: "Every person has the right to private property and that property shall not be arbitrarily taken over by anyone." This indicates that the State protects the Defendant's acquisition of property unrelated to the crime of corruption as private property protected by the State. Article 39 of the Criminal Procedure Code itself clearly defines the criteria for the Defendant's property that can be seized. In the future, the government should further and comprehensively regulate this in legislation to provide legal certainty in the effort to combat corruption in Indonesia. And also able to optimise the recovery of state losses due to acts of corruption.