PROOF OF THE ORIGINAL CRIMINAL ACT AS A CONDITION OF CONVICTION OF THE CRIMINAL ACT OF MONEY LAUNDERING (ANALYSIS OF VERDICT N0: 57/PID. SUS/2014/PN. SLR)

It is an injustice if a person who has actually received benefits from the Money Laundering Crimes but cannot be processed because original criminal act proven, this reason Constitutional Court rejected Akil Mochtars application to test Article 69 of Law Number 08 2010 concerning Prevention and Eradication Crimes. Is enough deprive their freedom property guaranteed in our Constitution 1945 Constitution, especially since there expert opinion that states violates principle Due Proces which partly adopted Criminal Procedure Code it embodiment concept State (Rechtstaat) such as presumption innocence, non-self-incrimination legality. In definition asset forfeiture mechanism, civil assets through justice. The recent development Act been believed by law enforcement stand-alone act. Civil should have pursued his according follow money turned into also chasing culprit. So, are cases where perpetrator crime was never proven helped going jail even though they did not enjoy money. fact, charges purely violations without any crime. midst shifting paradigms retributive justice restorative justice, seems article increasingly looming anomaly we Constitution.