Applying the Unexplained Wealth Doctrine as a Basis for Confiscating Corruptors’ Assets: Formulating a Fair Reversed Burden of Proof and Strengthening Its Application to Law-Enforcement Officers

Abstract

Asset recovery in Indonesian corruption cases remains constrained because confiscation generally depends on criminal proceedings and proof linking property to a predicate offence. This study examines the legal legitimacy of the unexplained wealth doctrine, formulates a proportionate reversed-burden model, and assesses the need for stronger scrutiny of assets held by law-enforcement officers. It employs normative legal research using statutory, conceptual, case, and comparative approaches. The study finds that shifting the evidentiary burden can be designed consistently with the presumption of innocence when it operates within an in rem mechanism and only after the State establishes objective grounds showing a material disparity between assets and lawful income. The article proposes a tiered balanced reversed-burden model consisting of an objective trigger, a prima facie burden on the State, an opportunity for the asset holder to establish lawful origin on the balance of probabilities, and a judicial determination accompanied by procedural safeguards. For law-enforcement officers, the mechanism should include independent examination to reduce structural conflicts of interest. This formulation may serve as a reference for future Indonesian asset-recovery reform.