Page 157 - BUKU STRENGTHENING THE INDONESIAN PARLIAMENTARY DIPLOMACY FADLI ZON

We can see that the development of legislative framework is essential to support the asset
recovery measures. These legislative frameworks including: strengthen preventive measures
against the proceeds of corruption, set up tools for rapid locating and freezing of assets,
establish a wide range asset recovery mechanism including recognition of non-conviction based
proceedings and private law actions, up to adopt law that encourage and facilitate international
cooperation.

Let us look to success stories of asset recovery, such as Sani Abacha case of Nigeria. During
its process where the country has successfully received $ 500 million of restitution assets from
Switzerland in 2005, there are more than three domestic legislative frameworks involved, not
to mention other international arrangements such as UNTOC, ECOWAS Protocol on the fight
against Corruption, AU Convention on Preventing and Combating Corruption and Related
Offences. These domestic legislations are: The Criminal Code Act (1961), Penal Code (1959),
Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Act (2003), Economic and Financial Crimes
(establishment) Act, 2004, Money Laundering (prohibition) Act, 2004. I believe that in other
1
cases, there are also many legislations involved when we are dealing with asset recovery,
especially during today’s digital era.

What is needed from parliament as political institution of the state and parliamentarians as the
political actors is not just a deep and comprehensive understanding of the issue itself. Strong
political will and commitment to recover their stolen assets are even more important.

Parliament and parliamentarians can introduce new measures and principles or even legislative
reform to support asset recovery measures, including through the application of non-conviction
asset based forfeiture—In Indonesia we are currently discussing this through the deliberation
of Asset Forfeiture in Criminal Matters Bill which shall include not only non-conviction
proceedings but also illicit enrichment provisions.

There is still some hypocrisy in this asset recovery. This can be seen in the development of
financial transparency regime, to ease efforts of tracing even confiscate the assets. When I was
at the UK Summit on Anti-Corruption last May, I see that some countries have pledged their
commitment to provide measures in registration of beneficial ownership. Some tax haven
countries such as Cayman Island and Isle of Man has urged big countries such as the United
States to join the global financial transparency regime as a trigger to promote further openness
and transparency of the US tax haven area. Their question remains: is there enough political
will to promote this transparency regime? It is time to end this hypocrisy.

1 http://etd.uwc.ac.za/xmlui/bitstream/handle/11394/2558/Opedayo_LLM_2010.pdf?sequence=1

144 I Selected Speeches of the Vice Speaker of the House of Representatives of the Republic of Indonesia