Enforcing transnational non-conviction-based confiscation orders: comparing the United Nations, European Union, Australian, and Indonesian legal frameworks
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
The present article compares and critically examines the enforcement of transnational non-conviction-based confiscation (NCBC) orders in the United Nations (UN), European Union (EU), Australian, and Indonesian legal frameworks utilising comparative legal and document analyses. The results serve as a reference for regulating a fair and effective framework for transnational NCBC enforcement in Indonesian law. This research compares the nature of NCBC, adaptive response conceptualisation, mechanisms facilitating transnational NCBC enforcement, and procedural safeguards in the transnational enforcement stage. It concludes that the relevant UN, EU, and Australian legal frameworks can serve as benchmarks for transnational NCBC enforcement in Indonesia, specifically regarding norm formulation of NCBC, international cooperation for effecting transnational NCBC orders, and the corresponding procedural safeguards to ensure fairness. However, the research findings indicate that practices of transnational NCBC enforcement in these jurisdictions have yet to generate significant references for empirical effectiveness benchmarking. Furthermore, this article discovers crucial implications for the criminological theory of adaptive response. Lastly, reconceptualisation of the Indonesian NCBC regime and proposals for reforming the Criminal Assets Confiscation Bill and the Mutual Legal Assistance in Criminal Matters Act are recommended.
Downloads
Article Details
Section
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
How to Cite
References
Alhadjri, A. (2018). Equanimity seizure invalid, rules Indonesian court. Malaysiakini. https://www.malaysiakini.com/news/420290.
Alldridge, P. (2003). Money laundering law: forfeiture, confiscation, civil recovery, criminal laundering, and taxation of the proceeds of crime. Hart Publishing.
Asia/Pacific Group on Money Laundering – APG (2018). Anti-money laundering and counter-terrorist financing measures – Indonesia, Third Round Mutual Evaluation Report. APG.
Attorney-General’s Department of Australia – AGD (2021). Annual Report 2020-21. Attorney-General’s Department.
Attorney-General’s Department of Australia – AGD (2022). Annual Report 2021-22. Attorney-General’s Department.
Attorney-General’s Department of Australia – AGD (2023). Annual Report 2022-23. Attorney-General’s Department.
Australia (1987a). Mutual Assistance in Criminal Matters Act 1987, No. 85, 1987, last amended by Act No. 63, 2023.
Australia (1987b). Mutual Assistance in Criminal Matters Act 1987, No. 85, 1987, amended by Act No. 86, 2002.
Australia (2002a). Proceeds of crime act 2002, No. 85, 2002, last amended by Act No. 54, 2024.
Australia (2002b). Proceeds of crime (Consequential Amendments and Transitional Provisions) Act 2002, Act No. 86 of 2002.
Australian Law Reform Commission – ALRC (1999). Confiscation that Counts: A Review of the Proceeds of Crime Act 1987 (ALRC Report 87). Australian Law Reform Commission.
Bartels, L. (2010). A review of confiscation schemes in Australia (AIC Reports Technical and Background Paper 36). Australian Institute of Criminology.
Bedner, A.W. (2010). An elementary approach to the rule of law. Hague Journal on the Rule of Law, 2(1), 48-74.
Bell, R.E. (1999). Civil forfeiture of criminal assets. The Journal of Criminal Law, 63(4), 371-384. https://doi.org/10.1177/002201839906300407.
Bireuen District Court (2021). Announcement regarding the request for handling of property No. 1/P-TPPU/2021/PN Bir (Pengumuman Permohonan Penanganan Harta Kekayaan Nomor Regester 1/P-TPPU/2021PN Bir).
Boister, N. (2018). An introduction to transnational criminal law (2nd ed.). Oxford University Press.
Böse, M. (2019). International law and treaty obligations, mutual legal assistance, and EU Instruments. In D.K. Brown et al. (Eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Criminal Process (pp. 609-630). Oxford University Press.
Boucht, J. (2017). The limits of asset confiscation: on the legitimacy of extended appropriation of criminal proceeds. Hart Publishing.
Boucht, J. (2019). Asset confiscation in Europe – past, present, and future challenges. Journal of Financial Crime, 26(2), 526-548. https://doi.org/10.1108/JFC-04-2018-0043.
Boucht, J. (2022). Non-conviction based confiscation: Moving the confiscation of criminal proceeds from the criminal to the ‘civil’ sphere: Benefits, Issues and Two Procedural Aspects. In V. Franssen & C. Harding (Eds.), Criminal and Quasi-criminal Enforcement Mechanisms in Europe: Origins, Concepts, Future (pp. 221-248). Hart Publishing.
Bowen, G.A. (2009). Document analysis as a qualitative research method. Qualitative Research Journal, 9(2), 27-40. https://doi.org/10.3316/QRJ0902027.
Bowles, R., Faure, M. & Garoupa, N. (2005). Forfeiture of illegal gain: An economic perspective. Oxford Journal of Legal Studies, 25(2), 275-295. https://doi.org/10.1093/ojls/gqi014.
Campbell, L. (2007). Theorising asset forfeiture in Ireland. Journal of Criminal Law, 71(5), 441-460. https://doi.org/10.1350/jcla.2007.71.5.441.
Campbell, L. (2010). The recovery of “Criminal” assets in New Zealand, Ireland, and England: fighting organised and serious crime in the civil realm. Victoria University Wellington Law Review, 41(1), 15-36. https://doi.org/10.26686/vuwlr.v41i1.5247.
Campbell, L. (2013). Organised crime and the law: A Comparative Analysis. Hart Publishing.
Cassella, S.D. (2015). Civil asset recovery – The American Experience. In J.P. Rui & U. Sieber (Eds.), Non-Conviction-Based Confiscation in Europe: Possibilities and Limitations on Rules enabling Confiscation without a Criminal Conviction (pp. 13-30). Duncker & Humblot.
Cassella, S.D. (2019). Nature and basic problems of non-conviction-based confiscation in the United States. Veredas do Direito, 16(34), 41-65. http://dx.doi.org/10.18623/rvd.v16i34.1334.
Cassella, S.D. (2021). Recovering the proceeds of foreign crimes that are found in the United States. North Carolina Journal of International Law, 46(3), 535-569.
Chrysikos, D. (2019). Article 46: Mutual legal assistance. In C. Rose, M. Kubiciel, & O. Landwehr (Eds.), The United Nations Convention against Corruption: A Commentary (pp. 440-473). Oxford University Press.
Clark, R.S. (2014). Jurisdiction over transnational crime. In N. Boister & R.J. Currie (Eds.), Routledge Handbook of Transnational Criminal Law (pp. 91-106). Routledge.
Cochrane, T. (2022.) The Presumption against Extraterritoriality, Mutual Legal Assistance, and the Future of Law Enforcement Cross-Border Evidence Collection. The Modern Law Review, 85(2), 526-538. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-2230.12675.
Colangelo, A.J. (2023). Criminal law extraterritoriality. In A. Parrish & C. Ryngaert (Eds.), Research Handbook on Extraterritoriality in International Law (pp. 310-325). Edward Elgar Publishing.
Conference of the States Parties to the United Nations Convention against Corruption – COSP UNCAC (2021). Procedures allowing the confiscation of proceeds of corruption without a criminal conviction (CAC/COSP/WG.2/2021/4).
Conference of the States Parties to the United Nations Convention against Corruption – COSP UNCAC (2023). Collection of information on international asset returns, including challenges, good practices and lessons learned (CAC/COSP/2023/15).
Council of Europe – CoE (2020). The Use of Non-Conviction Based Seizure and Confiscation. Council of Europe.
Dalglish, S.L., Khalid, H., & McMahon, S.A. (2020). Document analysis in health policy research: the READ approach. Health Policy and Planning, 35, 1424-1431. https://doi.org/10.1093/heapol/czaa064.
Desterbeck, F. & Schantz, D. (2009). Asset recovery: Possibilities and limitations. Eucrim 4, 162-168.
European Commission (2022). Commission staff working document – impact assessment report accompanying the document proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on asset recovery and confiscation.
European Commission - Directorate-General for Migration and Home Affairs (2023). Study to support the preparation of an impact assessment on EU policy initiatives on asset recovery and confiscation – Final report for acceptance. Publications Office of the European Union.
European Union (2012). Consolidated version of the treaty on the functioning of the European Union.
European Union (2014). Directive 2014/42/EU on the freezing and confiscation of instrumentalities and proceeds of crime in the European Union.
European Union (2018). Regulation (EU) 2018/1805 on the mutual recognition of freezing orders and confiscation orders.
European Union (2024). Directive (EU) 2024/1260 on asset recovery and confiscation.
Europol (2023). European financial and economic crime threat assessment 2023 - The Other Side of the Coin: An Analysis of Financial and Economic Crime. Publications Office of the European Union.
Financial Action Task Force – FATF (2023). Anti-money laundering and counter-terrorist financing measures – Indonesia, Fourth Round Mutual Evaluation Report. FATF.
Garland, D. (1996). The limits of the sovereign state: strategies of crime control in contemporary society. The British Journal of Criminology, 36(4), 445-471.
Garland, D. (2001). The culture of control: Crime and social order in contemporary society. The University of Chicago Press.
Goldsmith, A., Gray, D., & Smith, R.G. (2014). Criminal asset recovery in Australia. In C. King & C. Walker (Eds.), Dirty Assets: Emerging Issues in the Regulation of Criminal and Terrorist Assets (pp. 115-139). Routledge.
Grande, E. (2012). Comparative criminal justice. In M. Bussani & U. Mattei (Eds.), The Cambridge Companion to Comparative Law (pp. 189-207). Cambridge University Press.
Grandi, C. (2019). Non-conviction-based confiscation in the EU Legal Framework. In A. Bernardi (Ed.), Improving Confiscation Procedures in the European Union (pp. 31-55). Jovene Editore.
Gray, A.D. (2012a). Forfeiture provisions and the criminal/civil divide. New Criminal Law Review, 15(1), 32-67. https://doi.org/10.1525/nclr.2012.15.1.32.
Gray, A. (2012b). The compatibility of unexplained wealth provisions and ‘Civil’ forfeiture regimes with Kable. QUT Law & Justice Journal, 12(2), 18-35. DOI 10.5204/qutlr.v12i2.488.
Greenberg, T.S., Samuel, L.M., Grant, W., & Gray, L. (2009). stolen asset recovery: a good practices guide for non-conviction based asset forfeiture. The World Bank.
Gutterman, E. (2023). Extraterritoriality in the global governance of corruption: legal and political perspectives. In A. Parrish & C. Ryngaert (Eds.), Research Handbook on Extraterritoriality in International Law (pp. 430-442). Edward Elgar Publishing.
Hazim, A.M. (2020). Transnational crime, mutual legal assistance, and compliance with international obligations in the developing world: reforming and enforcing legal mechanisms to effectively combat transnational crime in Afghanistan. Doctoral thesis, University of Washington.
Hazim, A.M. (2022). Identifying and understanding mutual legal assistance obligations under international law: the case of Afghanistan. Gonzaga Journal of International Law, 26(1): 57-99.
Hendry, J. & King, C. (2015). How far is too far? Theorising non-conviction-based asset forfeiture. International Journal of Law in Context, 2(4), 398-411. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1744552315000269.
Hock, B. (2023). Extraterritoriality, economics and crime. In A. Parrish & C. Ryngaert (Eds.), Research Handbook on Extraterritoriality in International Law (pp. 76-91). Edward Elgar Publishing.
Hofmann, R. (2024). Investigations. In C. Peristeridou & A. Klip (Eds.), Comparative Perspectives of Criminal Procedure (pp. 51-77). Intersentia.
Hui, L.L. (2018). ‘Stolen 1MDB Funds: The DOJ Lawsuit Revisited. Malaysiakini. https://pages.malaysiakini.com/1mdb/en/.
Husa, J. (2013). Functional method in comparative law – much ado about nothing? European Property Law Journal, 2(1), 4-21. https://doi.org/10.1515/eplj-2013-0002.
Husa, J. (2015). A new introduction to comparative law. Hart Publishing.
Husein, Y. (2019). Restatement on non-conviction-based confiscation in corruption offence (Penjelasan Hukum tentang Perampasan Aset Tanpa Pemidanaan dalam Perkara Tindak Pidana Korupsi). PSHK.
Indonesian Financial Transactions Report and Analysis Centre – INTRAC (2021). Legal Analysis: Legal Issues and Optimization Measures as regards Assets Confiscation in the Law No. 8 of 2010 on the Prevention and Eradication of Money Laundering Offence (Kajian Hukum: Permasalahan Hukum Seputar Perampasan Aset dalam Undang-Undang Nomor 8 Tahun 2010 tentang Pencegahan dan Pemberantasan Tindak Pidana Pencucian Uang dan Upaya Pengoptimalisasiannya). INTRAC.
Ivory, R. (2019). Article 54: Mechanisms for recovery of property through international cooperation in confiscation. In C. Rose, M. Kubiciel, & O. Landwehr (Eds.), The United Nations Convention against Corruption: A Commentary (pp. 549-557). Oxford University Press.
Jones, T. & Newburn, T. (2007). Policy transfer and criminal justice: Exploring US Influence over British Crime Control Policy. Open University Press.
Kestemont, L. (2018). Handbook on legal methodology: From objective to method. Intersentia.
King, C. (2022). EU developments in non-conviction-based confiscation. In L. Hefferman (Ed.), Criminal Law and Justice in the European Union (pp. 105-120). Clarus Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4361086.
King, C. & Hendry, J. (2023). Civil recovery of criminal property. Oxford University Press.
Lea, J. (2004). Hitting criminals where it hurts: Organised crime and the erosion of due process. Cambrian Law Review, 35, 81-95.
Lintas Nasional (2022). First in Indonesia, implementation of supreme court regulation, Bireuen chief prosecutor receives proceeds of money laundering from the National Narcotics Agency (Pertama di Indonesia Implementasi Perma, Kejari Bireuen Terima Aset Hasil TPPU dari BNN RI). Lintas Nasional. July 1. https://www-lintasnasional-com.translate.goog/pertama-di-indonesia-implementasi-perma-kejari-bireuen-terima-aset-hasil-tppu-dari-bnn-ri/?_x_tr_sl=id&_x_tr_tl=en&_x_tr_hl=en&_x_tr_pto=wapp.
Luna, E. (2020). The perils of civil asset forfeiture. Harvard Journal of Law & Public Policy, 43(1), 23-30.
Malaysiakini (2018a). US files formal request for Indonesian help to seize Equanimity. Malaysiakini. https://www.malaysiakini.com/news/422045.
Malaysiakini (2018b). Arrest warrant obtained to seize yacht, says AG. Malaysiakini. https://www.malaysiakini.com/news/437793.
Maugeri, A.M. (2024). Regulation (EU) 2018/1805: Mutual recognition of freezing and confiscation orders between efficiency and safeguards. “Proceedings in criminal matters” and non-conviction based confiscation. New Journal of European Criminal Law, 15(2), 164-208. https://doi.org/10.1177/20322844241239781.
Menski, W. (2007). Beyond Europe. In E. Örücü & D. Nelken (Eds.), Comparative Law: A Handbook (pp. 189-216). Hart Publishing.
Millington, T. & Williams, M.S. (2007). The proceeds of crime: Law and Practice of Restraint, Confiscation, Condemnation and Forfeiture (2nd ed.). Oxford University Press.
Mirandola, S. (2020). Borderless enforcement of freezing and confiscation orders in the EU: the first regulation of mutual recognition in criminal matters. ERA Forum 20, 405-421. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12027-019-00581-x.
Morgan, H. (2022). Conducting a qualitative document analysis. The Qualitative Report, 27(1), 64-77. https://doi.org/10.46743/2160-3715/2022.5044.
National Law Development Agency (NLDA) of the Ministry of Law and Human Rights of the Republic of Indonesia (2012). Final Report of the Academic Paper of the Bill of Confiscation of Criminal Assets (Laporan Akhir Naskah Akademik Rancangan Undang-Undang tentang Perampasan Aset Tindak Pidana). National Law Development Agency.
National Law Development Agency (NLDA) of the Ministry of Law and Human Rights of the Republic of Indonesia (2015). Report of the Harmonisation Result of Academic Paper of the Bill of Confiscation of Criminal Assets (Laporan Hasil Penyelarasan Naskah Akademik Rancangan Undang-Undang tentang Perampasan Aset Tindak Pidana). National Law Development Agency.
National Law Development Agency (NLDA) of the Ministry of Law and Human Rights of the Republic of Indonesia (2022). Harmonisation Result of the Academic Paper of the Bill of Confiscation of Assets related to Criminal Offence (Hasil Penyelarasan Naskah Akademik Rancangan Undang-Undang tentang Perampasan Aset terkait dengan Tindak Pidana). National Law Development Agency.
Nelken, D. (2010). Comparative criminal justice. Sage.
Nessi, G. (2015). International cooperation to tackle transnational corruption: issues and trends in mutual legal assistance, extradition and asset recovery. Doctoral thesis, Università Commerciale Luigi Bocconi-Milano.
NST Online (2018). Indonesian police board the Equanimity again. New Straits Times. https://api.nst.com.my/world/2018/07/391545/indonesian-police-board-equanimity-again.
Ochnio, A.H. (2024). Recent developments in EU anti-corruption strategy: the missing element of the return of corrupt assets to “victim countries”. Journal of Money Laundering Control, 27(7), 1-12. 10.1108/JMLC-11-2023-0176.
Örücü, E. (2007). Developing Comparative Law. In E. Örücü & D. Nelken (Eds.), Comparative Law: A Handbook (pp. 43-65). Hart Publishing.
Pakes, F. (2019). Comparative criminal justice (4th ed.). Routledge.
Palmer, V.V. (2005). From Lerotholi to Lando: Some examples of comparative law methodology. The American Journal of Comparative Law, 53(1), 261-290. https://doi.org/10.1093/ajcl/53.1.261.
Parliament of the Commonwealth of Australia – House of Representatives (2002a). Proceeds of Crime Bill 2002: Explanatory Memorandum. Parliament of the Commonwealth of Australia.
Parliament of the Commonwealth of Australia – House of Representatives (2002b). Proceeds of Crime (Consequential Amendments and Transitional Provisions) Bill 2002: Explanatory Memorandum. Parliament of the Commonwealth of Australia.
Pavlidis, G. (2019). Learning from Failure: Cross-Border Confiscation in the EU. Journal of Financial Crime, 26(3), 683-691. https://doi.org/10.1108/JFC-08-2018-0087.
Peters, A. & Schwenke, H. (2000). Comparative law beyond post-modernism. The International and Comparative Law Quarterly, 49(4), 800-834. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0020589300064666.
Public Prosecution Service (PPS) of the Republic of Indonesia (2022). A video on its official Facebook account: https://www-facebook-com.translate.goog/100064391933878/videos/392149532783549/?_x_tr_sl=id&_x_tr_tl=en&_x_tr_hl=en&_x_tr_pto=wapp.
Purnamasari, D.P. & Sulistyo, P.D. (2023). New chapter for the formation of the asset forfeiture law. Kompas. https://www.kompas.id/baca/english/2023/05/06/new-chapter-for-the-formation-of-the-asset-forfeiture-law.
Republic of Indonesia (2006). Law No. 1 of 2006 on Mutual Legal Assistance in Criminal Matters (Undang-Undang Nomor 1 Tahun 2006 tentang Bantuan Timbal Balik dalam Masalah Pidana).
Republic of Indonesia (2010). Law No. 8 of 2010 on the Prevention and Eradication of Money Laundering Offence (Undang-Undang Nomor 8 Tahun 2010 tentang Pencegahan dan Pemberantasan Tindak Pidana Pencucian Uang).
Republic of Indonesia (2015). Bill of Confiscation of Criminal Assets (Rancangan Undang-Undang tentang Perampasan Aset Tindak Pidana). In National Law Development Agency (NLDA) of the Ministry of Law and Human Rights of the Republic of Indonesia, Report of the Harmonisation Result of Academic Paper of the Bill of Confiscation of Criminal Assets (Laporan Hasil Penyelarasan Naskah Akademik Rancangan Undang-Undang tentang Perampasan Aset Tindak Pidana). National Law Development Agency.
Republic of Indonesia (2019). Treaty Between the Republic of Indonesia and the Russian Federation on Mutual Legal Assistance in Criminal Matters.
Republic of Indonesia (2021). Law No. 5 of 2021 on the Ratification of the Treaty between the Republic of Indonesia and the Russian Federation on Mutual Legal Assistance in Criminal Matters [Undang-Undang Nomor 5 Tahun 2021 tentang Pengesahan Perjanjian antara Republik Indonesia dan Federasi Rusia tentang Bantuan Hukum Timbal Balik dalam Masalah Pidana (Treaty between the Republic of Indonesia and the Russian Federation on Mutual Legal Assistance in Criminal Matters)].
Republic of Indonesia (2023). Bill of Confiscation of Assets Related to Criminal Offences (Rancangan Undang-Undang tentang Perampasan Aset terkait dengan Tindak Pidana).
Ronsfeld, P. (2023). Mutual recognition and mutual trust. In K. Ambos & P. Rackow (Eds.), The Cambridge Companion to European Criminal Law (pp. 131-154). Cambridge University Press.
Rose, C. (2015). International anti-corruption norms: Their Creation and Influence on Domestic Legal Systems. Oxford University Press.
Rui, J.P. (2015). Introduction. In J.P. Rui & U. Sieber (Eds.), Non-conviction-based confiscation in Europe: Possibilities and limitations on rules enabling confiscation without a criminal conviction (pp. 1-11). Duncker & Humblot.
Rui, J.P. & Sieber, U. (2015). Non-conviction-based confiscation in Europe: Bringing the Picture Together. In J.P. Rui & U. Sieber (Eds.), Non-Conviction-Based Confiscation in Europe: Possibilities and Limitations on Rules Enabling Confiscation without a Criminal Conviction (pp. 245-304). Duncker & Humblot.
Sakellaraki, A. (2022). EU asset recovery and confiscation regime – quo vadis? A first assessment of the commission’s proposal to further harmonise the EU Asset Recovery and Confiscation Laws. A Step in the Right Direction? New Journal of European Criminal Law, 13(4), 478-501. https://doi.org/10.1177/20322844221139577.
Schunke, M.T. (2017). Extended confiscation in criminal law: National, European and International Perspectives. Intersentia.
Secretariat General of the House of Representatives of the Republic of Indonesia – SGHR (2005a). Chronicle of Deliberation Meeting of the Bill of Mutual Legal Assistance in Criminal Matters: Meeting of the Working Committee, Thursday, 1 December 2005 (Risalah Rapat Pembahasan Rancangan Undang-Undang tentang Bantuan Timbal Balik dalam Masalah Pidana: Rapat Panja, Kamis, 1 Desember 2005). In Deliberation Process of the Bill of Mutual Legal Assistance in Criminal Matters (Proses Pembahasan Rancangan Undang-Undang tentang Bantuan Timbal Balik dalam Masalah Pidana). Secretariat General of the House of Representatives of the Republic of Indonesia.
Secretariat General of the House of Representatives of the Republic of Indonesia – SGHR (2005b). Chronicle of Deliberation Meeting of the Bill of Mutual Legal Assistance in Criminal Matters: Meeting of the Working Committee, Monday, 5 December 2005 (Risalah Rapat Pembahasan Rancangan Undang-Undang tentang Bantuan Timbal Balik dalam Masalah Pidana: Rapat Panja, Senin, 5 Desember 2005). In Deliberation Process of the Bill of Mutual Legal Assistance in Criminal Matters (Proses Pembahasan Rancangan Undang-Undang tentang Bantuan Timbal Balik dalam Masalah Pidana). Secretariat General of the House of Representatives of the Republic of Indonesia.
Siems, M. (2018). Comparative law (2nd ed.). Cambridge University Press.
Simonato, M. & Fernandez-Bertier, M. (2019). Confiscation and fundamental rights: The quest for a consistent european approach. In A. Bernardi (Ed.), Improving Confiscation Procedures in the European Union (pp. 3-29). Jovene Editore.
Simser, J. (2009). Perspectives on civil forfeiture. In S.N.M. Young (Ed.), Civil forfeiture of criminal property: legal measures for targeting the proceeds of crime (pp. 13-20). Edward Elgar.
South Jakarta District Court (2018). Decision No. 38/Pid.Prap/2018/PN.Jkt.Sel. (Putusan Nomor: 38/Pid.Prap/2018/PN.Jkt.Sel).
Stein, R.A. (2019). What exactly is the rule of law? Houston Law Review, 57(1), 185-201.
Stessens, G. (2000). Money laundering: a new international law enforcement model. Cambridge University Press.
Stolen Asset Recovery Initiative – StAR (2020). 1MDB Equanimity Yacht case. https://star.worldbank.org/asset-recovery-watch-database/1mdb-equanimity-yacht-case.
Supreme Court of the Republic of Indonesia (2013). Regulation No. 01 of 2013 on the Procedure for Adjudicating the Request of Handling of Property in Money Laundering or Other Offences (Peraturan Nomor 1 Tahun 2013 tentang Tata Cara Penyelesaian Permohonan Penanganan Harta Kekayaan dalam Tindak Pidana Pencucian Uang atau Tindak Pidana Lain).
Takeuchi, M. (2023). Asian experience with extraterritoriality. In A. Parrish & C. Ryngaert (Eds.), Research Handbook on Extraterritoriality in International Law (pp. 164-179). Edward Elgar Publishing.
Tamanaha, B.Z. (2004). On the rule of law: history, politics, theory. Cambridge University Press.
Twining, W. (2011). Globalisation and legal scholarship. Wolf Legal Publishers and Tilburg Law School.
United Nations (2003). Convention against Corruption.
United States Department of Justice – US DOJ (2017). U.S. Seeks to Recover Approximately $540 Million Obtained from Corruption Involving Malaysian Sovereign Wealth Fund. https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/us-seeks-recover-approximately-540-million-obtained-corruption-involving-malaysian-sovereign.
United States District Court for the Central District of California (2017). United States of America, Plaintiff, v. Certain Rights to and Interests in the Viceroy Hotel Group, Defendant, No. CV 17-4438, Verified Complaint for Forfeiture In Rem [18 U.S.C. § 981(a)(1)(A) and (C)] [F.B.I.].
UNODC (2009). Technical Guide to the United Nations Convention against Corruption. United Nations.
UNODC (2010). Travaux préparatoires of the negotiations for the elaboration of the United Nations Convention against Corruption. United Nations.
UNODC (2012). Legislative guide for the implementation of the United Nations Convention against Corruption. United Nations.
UNODC (2018). Draft country review report of Australia: Review by Iceland and Pakistan of the implementation by Australia of articles 5-14 and 51-59 of the United Nations Convention against Corruption for the review cycle 2016-2021. UNODC.
UNODC (n.d.). United Nations Convention against Corruption. UNODC. https://www.unodc.org/unodc/en/corruption/uncac.html.
Valerian, D. (2024). How to rob thieves of their loot without conviction: insights from Indonesia. Leiden Law Blog. https://www.leidenlawblog.nl/articles/how-to-rob-thieves-of-their-loot-without-conviction-insights-from-indonesia.
Van Hoecke, M. (2015). Methodology of comparative legal research. Law and Method, 1-35. DOI: 10.5553/REM/.000010.
Vervaele, J.A.E. (2014). Mutual legal assistance in criminal matters to control (transnational) criminality. In N. Boister & R.J. Currie (Eds.), Routledge Handbook of Transnational Criminal Law (pp. 121-136). Routledge.
Vogel, J. (2015). The legal construction that property can do harm – Reflections on the rationality and legitimacy of “civil” forfeiture. In J.P. Rui & U. Sieber (Eds.), Non-Conviction-Based Confiscation in Europe: Possibilities and Limitations on Rules enabling Confiscation without a Criminal Conviction (pp. 225-243). Duncker & Humblot.
Zoumpoulakis, K. (2023). Comparative legal research. Universiteit Leiden.