The Indonesian Journal of International & Comparative Law Volume II Issue 1 (2015) at 41–97
Corruption, as a type of white collar crime, has been evolving into an in-
creasingly sophisticated enterprise, rendering direct evidence hard to dis-
cover through any existing legal apparatus. e international community
has responded to this situation by proposing that governments look to il-
licit enrichment of public ocials as a “yellow ag” that a corrupt oense
has happened. For instance, the Inter-American Convention Against
Corruption (hereinafter: IACAC) requires signatory parties to criminalize
illicit enrichment.1 Meanwhile, the United Nations Convention Against
Corruption (hereinafter: UNCAC) provides a non-mandatory provision
for signatory states to consider criminalizing illicit enrichment of public
ocials.2 ere have been varied responses from signatory parties.3 While
a number of countries have enacted domestic laws to criminalize illic-
it enrichment, such as Argentina,4 India,5 the Arab Republic of Egypt,6
1. Organization of American States, Inter American Convention Against Corruption,
art. IX, March 29, 1996, reprinted in35 I.L.M. 724(1996), available at http://
www.oas.org/juridico/english/treaties/b-58.html [hereinafter IACAC].
2. United Nations Convention Against Corruption, Dec. 14, 2005, 2349 U.N.T.S
41, available at http://www.unodc.org/documents/treaties/UNCAC/Publications/
Convention/08-50026_E.pdf [hereinafter UNCAC].
3. ere has been a debate whether signatory parties have to criminalize illicit
enrichment due to possibility in conict with human rights law standards of fair
trial. Nelly Gacheri Kamunde, e Crime of Illicit Enrichment under International
Anti-Corruption Legal Regime, K L, http://kenyalaw.org/kl/index.
php?id=1891 (last visited Dec. 15, 2014).
4. Código Penal [Cód. Pen.] [Criminal Code], art. 268 (2) (Abeledo Perrot, Buenos
Aires, 1971) (Arg.). See L M , O T: C
I E F C 26(2012).
5. e Prevention of Corruption Act, No. 49 of 1988, art. 13, availabe at http://
(Last visited Oct. 6, 2014) (India) [hereinafter e India Prevention of Corruption
Act]. Illicit enrichment rst was introduced as an evidentiary measure rathen than
a crime pursuant to Section 5(3) of the Prevention of Corruption Act. As the law
has been amended in 1988, Article 13 (1) recognizes that “a public servant is said
to commit the oense of criminal misconduct if he or any person on his behalf is
in possession or has, at any time during the period of his oce, been in possession
for which the public servant cannot satisfactorily account, of pecuniary resources
or property disproportionate to his known sources of income. is oense is also
punishable with a minimum imprisonment of one year, extendable up to seven
years, and also with a ne.”
6. e Arab Republic of Egypt Illegal Enrichment Law No. 62: Executive Regulations