Open Assembly to defend the title ?Doctor of Law? by Jamin Ginting

The breakdown of state assets? recovery from corruptors has been a classical problem. Some examples were the unclear cases of corruption assets recovery, such as BLBI, Century, and Robert Tantular. These facts were brought up by Prof. Dr. Indriyanto Seno Adji, SH, MH, who was the promotor in the Open Assembly to defend the title ?Doctor of Law? by Jamin Ginting , at UPH Campus, Lippo Village, on Wednesday ? October 27, 2010.

In reference to the above matter, Jamin Ginting through his research found out that the main cause of this breakdown was the disharmony of state?s institutions that play role in corruption eradication in Indonesia; also the domestic law where the assets have been residing, and the breakdown of internal bureaucracy among the state law enforcements: Police Department, State Attorney (Kejaksaan Agung), Corruption Eradication Committee (KPK), and the Ministry of Law and Human Rights (Kementerian Hukum dan HAM)as central authority. Looking at this, Ginting suggested a diversion of central authority power or narrow down all bureaucracies so that we can speed up the recovery of corruption assets. Another factor mentioned in the research was an institution?s ego-centric sense and jealousy among them. Those factors have caused the breakdown of corruption assets? recovery in Indonesia.

Meanwhile, co-promotor Dr. Rudi Satriyo M., SH.,MH. stated that the inability to manage assets from corruption offenses would create derivative corruptions. In reference to the third party?s interest which is considered as the owner of corruption assets, what would be his rights as well as law foundation when he wants to own the assets in a legal way? Responding to that question, Jamin Ginting firmly said that criminal offense punishment should still be in force, and the assets should be confiscated by the state. Next, the third parties who feel to have any interests on the assets confiscated by the state can file a law suit against the state and prove that those assets have gone through a legal diversion process.

In short, this dissertation highlighted the breakdown of corruption assets? recovery. In order to recover the state?s assets, there needs to be harmonious roles among all related institutions, e.g. Police Department, State Attorney (Kejaksaan), and Corruption Eradication Committee (KPK).

From Ginting?s research, we can infer the followings: first, the law stipulation in Indonesia up to present time has not yet decided on a special institution in charge of managing and recovering the assets from corruption offenses. The fact that Police Department, State Attorney (Kejaksaan), and Corruption Eradication Committee (KPK) can keep the corruption assets during investigation, prosecution, and execution process is absolutely against the regulated law, and these confiscated goods could be receding, ruined, or even misused.

Secondly, the regulation on the power held by law enforcements in terms of investigation and prosecution of corruption assets? recovery is still overlapping.

To overcome the problem, Ginting said that what needs to be done urgently is to ratify the Draft of Asset Deprivation Law, which regulates the deposit, management, and recovery of asset, as well as establishing independent body to do those tasks.

Meanwhile, to realize the harmony among law enforcements in reference to corruption assets? recovery, he suggested on revising the Law that regulates the authority of investigation and prosecution. Also, to make rules which regulate the relationships among law enforcement bodies.

In this assembly, as the jury there were also Prof. Dr. Bintan R. Saragih,  Prof Dr. Romli Atmasasmita, SH., LLM., Prof. Dr. Valerin J. L. Kreikhoff, Sh., MA., Prof. Dr. Ronny Nitibaskara, Dr. Yenti Garnasih, SH., MH., and Dr. Lodewijk Gultom, SH., MH. (ros)

UPH Media Relations