A law to seize corrupt wealth is being written where nobody can read it

Parliament has promised to pass the Asset Forfeiture Bill by 15 December. It is the law that would let the state take back houses, land and cars bought with stolen public money, and anti-corruption campaigners have wanted it since 2008, when the financial intelligence agency PPATK first proposed it. Writing for Indonesia at Melbourne, Feri Amsari points at the problem underneath the good news: the DPR has not released an official draft, or the academic paper that is supposed to explain it. People can cheer for the bill, but they cannot read it.

That is a legal failure, not only an annoyance. The Constitutional Court, in decision 91/PUU-XVIII/2020, set out three things the public is owed while a law is being written: the right to be heard, the right to have those views actually considered, and the right to an explanation of what was done with them. A bill nobody outside the building has seen fails all three.

Amsari also looks again at the protest that produced the December deadline. Tempo reported that a Gerindra politician helped persuade residents of Pati to march, that protest leaders met DPR leadership before the rally, and that they held a video call with Prabowo, who voiced support. The marchers were later invited into the plenary chamber, where Deputy Speaker Sufmi Dasco Ahmad promised to resign if the deadline slips. A demand that looks like it came from the street may have been arranged inside.

The worry is what an unread law can be used for. A forfeiture power written without scrutiny can be aimed at the bank accounts of opponents and of pro-democracy groups, and the government is also preparing an anti-espionage law that could treat work between Indonesian civil society organisations and international bodies as foreign intelligence activity. Amsari ends by asking whether law here is turning into a tool of political repression.

Why it matters

If you work for an NGO, a foundation or a research group that takes money from abroad, these two bills together decide whether that funding is normal or suspicious. The thing to watch is simple: whether a full draft appears in public before a vote is scheduled, because a law passed in December that nobody read in September will be interpreted by the people who wrote it. Most Indonesians want corrupt wealth taken back, and that is exactly why the text should be argued over now rather than after the first seizure.