MEKANISME PEMBALlKAN BEBAN PEMBUKTIAN TINDAK PIDANA PENCUCIAN UANG
| Main Author: | Wangga, Maria Silvya E. |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article eJournal |
| Bahasa: | eng |
| Terbitan: |
[ 2 ] ADIL JURNAL HUKUM
, 2013
|
| Online Access: |
http://lib.law.ugm.ac.id/ojs/index.php/ajh/article/view/3403 |
Daftar Isi:
- A report released by the Indonesian Financial Transaction Reports and Analysis Center (INTRAC, in BahasaPPATK) reveals that money laundry, which is increasing every year, has been such a common, systematic, and well-managed practice that-since those in executive, legislative, and judicative bodies are involved-it is most unlikely to uncover. The report discloses that, from 2007 to 2011, there were 2,258 suspicious financial transactions. One of the matters stipulated in the Law No.8 of 2010 on Anti-Money Laundering is Reversal Burden Of Proof (omkering van bewijslast in Dutch) toward suspects for their wealth, associated with a legal case, which does not come from or which is not related to any criminal act as stipulated in Article 2 Subsection 1 of the Prevention and Eradication Law ofthe Criminal Act of Money Laundering. The mechanism ofReversal Burden OfProof(omkering van bewijslast) by a suspect is conducted only during hearing sessions in the ยท court by offering sufficient evidence. Ifthe suspect is unable to prove that his wealth is not the proceeds of criminal activities, then this mechanism is liable only to his wealth while such transaction-related factors as placements, transfers, payments, expenses, grants, dO'1ations, and deposits of sums of money or other acts or activities associated with money shOuld be proven by prosecuting attorneys. The implementation ofthis Reversal Burden ofProofshould be encouraged through building more capacity and competence ofthe law enforcers in investigating and disclosing wealth and by imposing wealth-disclosure on apparatus for their riches before, during, and after serving the office.