The Juridical Validity of the Asset Seizure Prohibition for the Indonesia Investment Authority (INA)

Article 160, paragraph (3) of the Job Creation Law prohibits the confiscation of assets by the Indonesia Investment Authority (INA). The provision prohibiting asset confiscation raises problems in the form of norm conflicts with the provisions of bail confiscation, criminal confiscation, and bankruptcy confiscation. Therefore, it is necessary to analyze the validity of the norms prohibiting the confiscation of INA assets. Based on this background, the purpose of this study is to analyze the juridical validity of the norms prohibiting the seizure of INA assets. This research uses a statutory and conceptual approach. The type of legal material consists of primary and secondary legal materials sourced from both primary and secondary data. The legal materials are analyzed through interpretation techniques. The results of this study reveal that the norm prohibiting the confiscation of INA assets in positive law does not fulfill the principle of juridical validity, making it an invalid norm. Suggestions to the legislators to make changes to the formulation of Article 160 paragraph (3) of the Job Creation Law in order to fulfill the principle of juridical validity.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
International Journal of Business Law and Education
Published
2025-06-08
DOI
https://doi.org/10.56442/ijble.v6i1.1123
Primary Topic
International Arbitration and Investment Law
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

The Juridical Validity of the Asset Seizure Prohibition for the Indonesia Investment Authority (INA)

Amelia Sri Kusuma Dewi, Muhammad Faizal, Budi Santoso
International Journal of Business Law and Education
International Arbitration and Investment Law
article

The Juridical Validity of the Asset Seizure Prohibition for the Indonesia Investment Authority (INA)

Amelia Sri Kusuma Dewi, Muhammad Faizal, Budi Santoso
article en

Abstract

Article 160, paragraph (3) of the Job Creation Law prohibits the confiscation of assets by the Indonesia Investment Authority (INA). The provision prohibiting asset confiscation raises problems in the form of norm conflicts with the provisions of bail confiscation, criminal confiscation, and bankruptcy confiscation. Therefore, it is necessary to analyze the validity of the norms prohibiting the confiscation of INA assets. Based on this background, the purpose of this study is to analyze the juridical validity of the norms prohibiting the seizure of INA assets. This research uses a statutory and conceptual approach. The type of legal material consists of primary and secondary legal materials sourced from both primary and secondary data. The legal materials are analyzed through interpretation techniques. The results of this study reveal that the norm prohibiting the confiscation of INA assets in positive law does not fulfill the principle of juridical validity, making it an invalid norm. Suggestions to the legislators to make changes to the formulation of Article 160 paragraph (3) of the Job Creation Law in order to fulfill the principle of juridical validity.

International Journal of Business Law and EducationVol. 6(1)
University of Brawijaya (ID)
Openalex Percentile: Top 81%
International Arbitration and Investment Law
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.