Reconstructing Asset Recovery Mechanisms Following a Suspect’s Death in Corruption Investigations through a Civil ‘In Rem’ Approach

Abstract

This study analyzes the legal status of property seized during corruption investigations following a suspect’s death at pre-trial and proposes a reconstructive legal framework to strengthen state asset recovery mechanisms. This inquiry departs from a profound doctrinal dilemma in modern, global anti-corruption enforcement: when a suspect dies during the investigation phase, criminal procedural laws generally revoke the state’s authority to prosecute, resulting in formal case dismissal without a final judicial conviction. Consequently, a normative loophole arises: the formal procedural obligation to return seized assets to the suspect’s heirs conflicts with the substantive mandate to restore illicitly drained public resources. Employing a normative juridical research design that integrates statutory and conceptual approaches, this research uses an Indonesian empirical case study (Court Decision No. 519/Pdt.G/2022/PN Dps) to systematically evaluate the intersection of criminal procedural limitations and civil redress mechanisms. The findings demonstrate that while a suspect’s death terminates personal criminal liability (in personam), it does not remove or validate the inherently unlawful origin of the underlying property (in rem). To resolve this procedural impasse and align with the United Nations Convention Against Corruption (UNCAC) as an international standard, the study concludes that state authorities must shift asset recovery to the civil domain. By empowering prosecutors to act as State Attorneys and file civil compensation lawsuits against heirs, the state can effectively execute non-conviction-based (NCB) asset forfeiture, ensuring accountable asset retrieval while upholding constitutional due process guarantees.

Keywords: Asset Recovery; Seized Property; Suspect’s Death; Corruption Investigation; Civil in Rem Lawsuit.