Looting as Aggravated Theft

Looting in criminal law is not known as a specific term. Criminal law expert from Trisakti University, Abdul Fickar Hadjar, in an interview with Metro TV on Tuesday, September 2, 2025, emphasized:
“Looting is mass theft, meaning it can still be processed legally. When it has been done, the crime has occurred. The fact that the proceeds of the crime are returned does not eliminate the criminal law.”
This statement shows that although the term looting is not explicitly stated in theCriminal Code (KUHP), the act is seen asaggravated theft. Taking other people's property by force and in groups, especially in riot situations, is considered a form of theft aggravated by circumstances. This is in line with the provisions ofArticle 363 of the Criminal Code, which regulates a heavier threat of criminal penalties than ordinary theft.Article 363 of the Criminal Codebecomes the main criminal umbrella for looting cases. Paragraph (1) of the article states that theft that occurs during a fire, riot, or at night in a house can be punished with a maximum imprisonment of seven years. Because the looting of officials' houses occurred in the midst of riots, the perpetrators are clearly threatened with punishment according to these provisions. More broadly, criminal sanctions aim to enforce order and protect society from public crime. In other words, looting is not only a crime against individuals, but also damages public safety and trust. Therefore, the Criminal Code emphasizes that perpetrators of looting must be processed legally as regulated, in order to provide a deterrent effect and restore public order.