Google Cloud Speech-to-Text API (Chirp) + Gemini 2.5 Flash Non-Thinking. Treat it as a searchable index of what was broadcast, not a quotation record.
00:00:00to ee the provisions in ee number 13 team
00:00:0313 what is that number 13 gives a
00:00:07definition of assets, yes.
00:00:09Assets are all movable or immovable objects,
00:00:13both tangible and intangible, that have economic
00:00:17value, those are assets. But assets that can be confiscated
00:00:20ee what's it called, in the context of tools, it can't be
00:00:24generally equated to all assets, sir. The emphasis
00:00:28is on the tools, yes. Tools used by people,
00:00:32used, so it's not general,
00:00:34sir.
00:00:36Yes, yes, tools, yes, tools. Yes, that can be used
00:00:40like a knife, yes, yes, the
00:00:43emphasis
00:00:47Article 4. What was Article 4 in is on the tools. Yes, I agree, sir.
00:00:51Agree, yes, I agree, sir. Back to the formulation, back to the formulation.
00:00:54Yes, 59, yes, 59. Because the correct
00:00:57one is 59, so 59 remains sir. It remains because
00:01:01I have an addition, sir. I think what the chairman
00:01:05means is the tools used to commit crimes, right, sir? Yes,
00:01:09that's right, sir. If it's that, it's right, sir, it remains. Yes, if the others are
00:01:12the proceeds of other crimes, etc., they are in other
00:01:15categories.
00:01:18Okay, then we go down to 60
00:01:21again.
00:01:27Now, please explain the background of 60.
00:01:31What is the background of the DPR making this law, this draft?
00:01:34ini
00:01:42Permission, ee it's in ee 60,
00:01:46sir. If it's within our view, we can
00:01:49accept the government's proposal, sir. So, ee the item, we change
00:01:53it to "found items," sir. So it's not just in the
00:01:58sir, during the drafting process, form of goods, sir, because the development is not just
00:02:00goods, sir, like that, sir. The team
00:02:0360. Yes, letter c
00:02:07in Article 5 paragraph 1 letter c, sir, we
00:02:11Well, I agree with what can agree because it is indeed
00:02:14broader, sir, not only in the form of goods but in other tangible forms,
00:02:18sir. That's why we use "found items,"
00:02:20sir. Isn't that too broad,
00:02:24you know? Please read letter C, everyone. This C is quite
00:02:28important.
00:02:31Abuse of power, this is dangerous. Permission, leaders,
00:02:34yes, right, sir. Oh, yes,
00:02:36please. Permission,
00:02:40leaders.
00:02:42Eh, professor, I want a broader definition of
00:02:46the difference between found goods
00:02:49Oh, is it there too? Included, right? and found items. Because I want to remind everyone again, let's not
00:02:53give law enforcement agencies a loophole to abuse
00:02:56power by using differences or
00:03:17Permission, so if I look at what
00:03:20is in our formulation and the government's formulation,
00:03:24the government ee
00:03:27assets have already been formulated in the general
00:03:30provisions. So then
00:03:33the government no longer refers to assets that are goods, because
00:03:39eh a post defendant as referred to assets have already been formulated there. Yes, so assets
00:03:43in my opinion, I agree with what mean goods that have already been formulated there, which are found items
00:03:47that are known to be the proceeds of a crime. That is if
00:03:50the government wants to shorten it, because the definition
00:03:56Permission, leaders, to add to of assets has already been formulated in the general provisions, so...
00:04:00no need to repeat it. That's roughly it, right? Yes, thank you.
00:04:13Again, there's still
00:04:17Mr. Martin. El Martin El
00:04:23Gondes. Done, right, stop,
00:04:26right?
00:04:31Next.
00:04:34Ah, yes, in 70.
00:04:38For the general section, we propose two parts: first, asset forfeiture law
00:04:41based on criminal
00:04:44judgments.
00:04:48The title.
00:04:54Yes.
00:04:54First.
00:05:03Bian
00:05:04Katumpang.
00:05:36That's it, okay, right? It's just a matter of the title.
00:05:39Title.
00:05:52Din 71 Article 7 paragraph
00:05:551, asset forfeiture
00:05:58based on a criminal judgment against the perpetrator
00:06:02of a crime as referred to in Article 3 letter
00:06:06a, carried out based on the law concerning
00:06:09criminal procedure or procedure law. in
00:06:13the law regulating crimes as
00:06:16referred to in Article 4 paragraphs 1 and 3.
00:06:19Redactional drafting corrections only, leaders.
00:06:22Investigation and prosecution are carried out against the perpetrators
00:06:26of crimes, not against asset forfeiture, so
00:06:29there is no investigation or prosecution against asset
00:06:32forfeiture under the CBF regime. Second,
00:06:36delete the phrase "unless otherwise stipulated
00:06:40in this law" because there are no other provisions regulated differently in
00:06:43this law. Thus, the explanation
00:06:45from the leadership.
00:06:49Answer briefly,
00:07:07Prof Bayu, please.
00:07:10Permission, ee leader, ee we still stick
00:07:13with the DPR draft because specifically, "unless otherwise stipulated
00:07:17in this law" indicates a lex specialis
00:07:21compared to what is in the Criminal Procedure Code and other provisions. So, this
00:07:25is specifically included, "unless otherwise stipulated in this law," so this is indeed
00:07:28an affirmation that this is a lex
00:07:51Oh, in Article 7, there's paragraph 3. Please check it first, sir, in the draft.
00:07:55Paragraph 3. Paragraph 3. We checked it last time and
00:07:59it was indeed pending.
00:08:02Included. Paragraph
00:08:053.
00:08:10Which one is it? Is it 73? No, right?
00:08:56Paragraph 2, we discuss it here, sir. Paragraph 3, sir. Discuss it here, sir. Sir.
00:09:00We discuss two and three here. Let's discuss
00:09:04two first, two first, okay,
00:09:07ready.
00:09:56Ha, for Danah, right? Yes.
00:09:59Letter B, right? What, sir? Paragraph 2 letter
00:10:02b.
00:10:05Article 7 paragraph 2 that is from the government
00:10:08to remove the word sanction, right, sir?
00:10:12Yes, only that, right? Oh, it's okay, that's a
00:10:15sanction. Yes, yes, okay, this is because
00:10:18Prof Edi OS understands this. Right, next. Oh, approved,
00:10:3973.
00:10:43Ha. Deleted,
00:10:47right? Eh, paragraph 3. Assets related to crimes
00:10:50based on criminal judgments against perpetrators
00:10:53of crimes that can be confiscated as referred to in
00:10:57paragraph 1 originate from crimes as referred to
00:11:00in Article 4 paragraphs 1 and 3 as regulated in
00:11:04this law, this law, right? This law
00:11:07is just the paragraph. Yes, what is it? Try to find
00:11:12the law? Article 4. Article 4.
00:11:16Open Article 4 paragraphs 1 and
00:11:193.
00:11:22No, try to open it. Everyone can see it.
00:11:27Eh, operator, open Article
00:11:284.
00:11:34Which one is on the right? Okay.
00:11:50Not within the scope, right? Yes, right?
00:11:53Okay, back to the article. Just now.
00:11:57Seven, paragraph 3. Paragraph
00:11:593.
00:12:02Paragraph 2 or paragraph 3? Paragraph 3 only. 7 paragraph
00:12:053.
00:12:10Yes, paragraph 3 should be
00:12:11deleted.
00:12:16What does this article mean? Permission, leaders, ee
00:12:20paragraph 3 should be deleted, both the DPR's proposal and
00:12:23the government's, because if this exists, leaders, if it only
00:12:27refers to this paragraph 3, then
00:12:30the in personam in the Criminal Code will only be
00:12:34limited to crimes mentioned in Article 4 paragraph 1
00:12:38and paragraph 3. Whereas in the Criminal Code, all assets
00:12:41related to crimes can be confiscated as an additional penalty in personam.
00:12:44So, earlier we explained that paragraph 3
00:12:47should both be deleted because it will limit
00:12:50the in personam in the Criminal Code, which actually can be applied to all types of crimes.
00:12:54As an additional penalty, yes, that's right.
00:13:40Continue.
00:13:48Prof. Dim 78 paragraph
00:13:513. In the event of an examination process.
00:13:55The request for asset forfeiture as referred to in paragraph
00:13:582 has already begun and the suspect or
00:14:03in Article 6 paragraph 1 letter A
00:14:06is caught, the process of examining the request for asset forfeiture
00:14:09without a criminal judgment against the perpetrator
00:14:13of the crime is terminated with a judge's order, and
00:14:16the investigation process against the suspect and the prosecution
00:14:20against the suspect are continued in accordance with
00:14:23criminal procedural law. First, what
00:14:27our argument is that if caught, the request is terminated, then
00:14:30continued with the CB mechanism. The judge determines
00:14:34that the NCB examination is terminated. Second, there needs to be
00:14:37a termination of the NCB examination
00:14:41to avoid pending NCB cases
00:14:44when the CB examination is continued and
00:14:47completed. Third, if he absconds
00:14:51again, the JPN submits a new request. That's all.
00:15:49Eh, first, our reference, let's both
00:15:53correct Article 6 paragraph 1 letter b, because it will refer to suspects
00:15:56or defendants who have absconded. So our reference is not letter
00:16:00a, both must be Article 6 paragraph 1 letter b. Now,
00:16:04this certainly requires the direction of the leader. If we keep
00:16:08it suspended, because if someone then the suspect/defendant
00:16:11absconds at each stage of the process, they could
00:16:15die after that, meaning we
00:16:18don't want to repeat it, meaning it was suspended earlier, or at the same time, they could
00:16:21abscond again, right? So why then is the word
00:16:24"suspended" used? It means it can be continued
00:16:28later. But if, after being caught, the process
00:16:31is carried out in personam until completion, then
00:16:35there's no need for a continuation of the in rem. So we still prefer
00:16:39"suspended" instead of "terminated" because there's still a chance for it to be suspended.
00:17:01I'm afraid.
00:17:04Please, permission, leader, sir, professor. So this
00:17:07process, ee, if we look at ee
00:17:10the draft, it's like this:
00:17:13In the event that the examination process
00:17:17for asset forfeiture as referred to in paragraph
00:17:202 has already begun and the suspect
00:17:23as referred to in paragraph 6 is caught, then the process
00:17:26of examining asset forfeiture based on a criminal judgment
00:17:29against the perpetrator of a crime is suspended. This means
00:17:33that right now we are in the process
00:17:36of NCB.
00:17:39Then the perpetrator is
00:17:41caught. This NCB is, according to the government,
00:17:45terminated.
00:17:48is in the DPR draft for two reasons. First, if
00:17:52it's suspended, it's internal.
00:17:56So when he absconds again, as Prof Bayu
00:17:59said, we immediately reopen it. But
00:18:03if the government's version is terminated,
00:18:06there's a legal product. There must be
00:18:10a notification from the investigator to what?
00:18:13The prosecutor or to
00:18:15the court. It's difficult to reopen it.
00:18:19There must be a process that will be challenged and so on. So, in my opinion,
00:18:23the word "suspended" is appropriate because it's only
00:18:27internal, no need to do any
00:18:31notification to the suspect, to
00:18:34others, no need, because it's just for... for ee what
00:18:38investigation technicalities, you know. So,
00:18:41it's more practical, better, and what,
00:18:45what, yes, it doesn't
00:18:48require a complicated process. If the word
00:18:52"terminated" is used, it can definitely be challenged.
00:18:55"Hey, you already terminated it, you reopened it?" In a pre-trial
00:18:58hearing, etc., it will make it difficult for investigators, make it difficult for everyone,
00:19:01in my opinion. Thank
00:19:03you.
00:19:13Mr. Andang, thank you, leaders. Permission,
00:19:17if
00:19:21was proposed by the government, because
00:19:23when that process is ongoing in personam,
00:19:27then the person
00:19:29runs away, then NCB
00:19:33can be initiated. Then the person
00:19:36is caught.
00:19:39If they're caught again, they probably won't run away again. So maybe
00:19:43the NCB earlier is terminated like that. If
00:19:46suspended, it hangs.
00:19:49So finally, thank
00:19:51you.
00:19:56Again, excuse me, left, left. Mr. Jamil, regarding what
00:20:00was conveyed earlier, even though I tried
00:20:03to see it, eh in our notes...
00:20:08the state must continue to pursue the person, sir,
00:20:11yes, here, because for us, this must be
00:20:15maintained, yes. So
00:20:18this NCB, this NCB does not abolish yes
00:20:22the criminal liability of the perpetrator.
00:20:26So the state, in our view, still has to
00:20:30pursue, not just the assets. Thus,
00:20:33ee our brief view, chairman, thank
00:20:36you.
00:20:43Again. Permission,
00:20:46government. So, if we look at this draft, it's like this.
00:20:50In the event that the examination process for asset forfeiture
00:20:53as referred to in paragraph 2 has already
00:20:57begun and the suspect or defendant
00:21:00as referred to in Article 6 paragraph 1 letter a
00:21:04is caught, it means that when
00:21:06we are conducting the process, the perpetrator
00:21:10has absconded. So our process is
00:21:14NCB, not CB,
00:21:17right? Yes. When
00:21:21caught, then the process goes to CB.
00:21:24The NCB is, according to the government,
00:21:27terminated. According to us,
00:21:30suspended. Well, I agree, I
00:21:33agree with suspended earlier because it's only internal.
00:21:36If terminated,
00:21:39it must be notified to
00:21:42what? To the suspect, to
00:21:45the court, or to wherever, right?
00:21:48So when later
00:21:51he, for example, absconds or, not absconds, but dies,
00:21:54or he gets sick
00:21:57and can't, what,
00:22:00yes, permanently, NCB must
00:22:03continue. When NCB continues,
00:22:07the government has already terminated it.
00:22:11The word "terminated," termination has legal consequences
00:22:14that can be challenged by
00:22:17his family and so on, right? Well, if
00:22:21we suspend it internally only, then
00:22:24it can just be reopened. No need for a complicated
00:22:28process. That's my opinion. Thank
00:22:30you. Okay, yes, suspended,
00:22:33right?
00:22:36Mr. Edi OS, please try. Yes, so
00:22:39it's like this,
00:22:42sir. So indeed, when we held an internal meeting,
00:22:48as he said earlier, sir. So indeed, the prosecutor's office and the police
00:22:51said not to suspend it. If suspended, then there is no legal certainty,
00:22:55but it must be terminated. If he indeed absconds,
00:22:58then it can just be re-filed
00:23:02for the NCB process. Indeed, the terms "terminated" and
00:23:05"suspended" sound trivial, but this
00:23:08has a very, very significant impact related to the issue
00:23:11of expiration. If the term "suspended,"
00:23:15"Rusten," means that to continue the case,
00:23:18it only needs to continue from the previous
00:23:21expiration. But if terminated, the expiration
00:23:24is calculated anew. Ah, this is also so that the perpetrator, if he
00:23:28wants to abscond, he will also think, because he will be pursued
00:23:31no matter what, because the term "terminated" means "stuiting
00:23:35verjaring," what's it called, the expiration will be recalculated.
00:23:39But if suspended, the expiration continues to run. So,
00:23:42for example, if there is a civil dispute, sir, a civil dispute, it
00:23:46suspends what, the running of the expiration. But if the
00:23:50perpetrator absconds, it's not suspending but terminating.
00:23:53Ah, it's roughly like that, sir. Permission, ee
00:23:57government, professor. We are saying
00:24:00suspended and terminated. That has, has, has
00:24:04a connection with other things, you know. If
00:24:07terminated, immediately
00:24:10that seizure must also be lifted.
00:24:13The blocking must be revoked and
00:24:16so on, right? There's the word "terminated."
00:24:20Right? That has an impact. But if
00:24:24suspended, it's just suspended, but it doesn't involve
00:24:28other things, because other processes are ongoing.
00:24:31Well, even if it's NCB or
00:24:35CB, it's one process that
00:24:39we will try, try.
00:24:41Ah.
00:24:46paragraphs 4 and 5. Actually, the issue of expiration
00:24:50earlier is answered in paragraph 5. So in paragraph
00:24:524, in the event that the asset forfeiture process without a criminal
00:24:56judgment against the perpetrator of a crime is suspended, meaning
00:24:59the NCB earlier is suspended, then the prosecution process against the suspect/defendant as referred
00:25:03to in ethics is continued with, of course, the CB
00:25:07in personam. Well, paragraph 5
00:25:10answers the issue of expiration here. In the event that the judgment against
00:25:14the suspect or defendant referred to in paragraph 4 is an acquittal
00:25:17or discharge from all legal demands, then the examination process
00:25:20for asset forfeiture without a criminal judgment
00:25:24on assets in paragraph 3 is terminated. This means it's actually finished
00:25:27here, right? The expiration is finished
00:26:45This is from the public prosecutor, since this is already
00:26:48approaching, we will agree at 12 o'clock we will
00:26:52take a break for prayer first,
00:26:54yes.
00:27:01Yes, please.
00:27:15Alright, I will continue, Your Honor.
00:27:17To the witness, this is on
00:27:21the screen, I want to compare or
00:27:24contrast. This is a photo that you just saw,
00:27:27witness, that we presented to the
00:27:30presiding judge or in front of the
00:27:33witness room in the courtroom, and we will also compare
00:27:37from Dharmawan, it has been presented. The one
00:27:41on the
00:27:43side here, yes, this
00:27:46one first. Yes, that's right, this
00:27:50is your photo, witness. That's right,
00:27:53Your Honor. Next to you, who is that, witness?
00:27:57My future wife,
00:28:09ee, witness, I also took it quite a while
00:28:12ago. Sir. This was when
00:28:16you were in college at that time. Yes,
00:28:19Your Honor. Good. Is it true that this is your photo,
00:28:22witness? That's right, Your Honor. That's right.
00:28:24I'll continue.
00:28:28Is it true that this is also your photo, witness? That's right,
00:28:32Your Honor. Yes, at that time it was called your wedding
00:28:35photo. You know it was in 1986. Is that right, witness?
00:28:38You will get married.
00:28:52is also your photo, witness, right? Yes, my photo
00:28:55with my parents, Your Honor.
00:28:59Please show it again to Hijadi.
00:29:32explained that earlier
00:29:35you, Dian Sandi, had seen
00:29:38melihat
00:29:41on X or Twitter, correct? Yes.
00:29:45Correct. Correct. From where? Did you know? I don't know,
00:29:48Your Honor. You don't know, right?
00:29:51Alright, witness, eh, we also
00:29:55asked earlier about
00:29:57the book.
00:30:00You, witness, never gave
00:30:03eh to the defendant to conduct
00:30:07any test or research regarding your diploma,
00:30:11witness. Correct? Correct? Did not ask for permission, Your Honor. And
00:30:14you, witness, is it true that you never gave
00:30:18any copy in any form regarding your diploma, witness, to
00:30:22the defendant? No.
00:30:24Good.