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.
https://doi.org/10.32697/integritas.v11i1.1520
https://jurnal.kpk.go.id/index.php/integritas/article/view/1520
