For years, fugitive businessman Paulus Tannos has managed to evade justice in Indonesia despite being a key suspect in the multi-trillion-rupiah e-ID project, one of the country’s most egregious corruption scandals. His prolonged freedom is not just an isolated case, but a troubling reflection of two overlapping failures.
First, it exposes how the global system of citizenship and residency has been increasingly manipulated by individuals with deep pockets. In a world where money can buy you a new identity, golden passport schemes offer an escape hatch for financial criminals, allowing them to legally disappear while continuing to live, invest and operate with impunity. Second, it highlights the weakness of Indonesia’s own political will to pursue high-profile corruption fugitives and recover stolen assets. This institutional inertia is deeply ironic, especially given President Prabowo Subianto’s repeated public commitment to combating corruption and strengthening law enforcement.
Yet, the silence on this case speaks volumes. Golden passports and investment visas, also known as citizenship- and residence-by-investment (CBI and RBI), have become highly lucrative industries in some countries. In theory, these schemes are meant to attract foreign direct investment and stimulate local economies. In practice, however, they have opened the door to widespread abuse. Transparency International and investigative journalists have shown how these programs frequently help corrupt officials, tax evaders and financial criminals launder their identity along with their assets. Tannos reportedly acquired a passport from Guinea-Bissau, a West African country that has been flagged repeatedly for its lack of transparency and poor vetting procedures in selling citizenship.
According to a report by Transparency International European Union, Guinea-Bissau is among the jurisdictions most exploited by financial criminals seeking to evade prosecution. Despite the red flags, however, there has been little to no official follow-up by Indonesian authorities to confirm Tannos’ new identity or formally engage with the country in question. This raises deeper questions about how seriously Indonesia is pursuing fugitive recovery. The process is often reactive and slow. Red notices from Interpol are delayed, diplomatic channels underutilized and international cooperation remains patchy at best. We continue to treat this as a matter of administration rather than urgency, losing critical time and leverage in the process. Tannos is known to live in Singapore, with which Indonesia has signed an extradition treaty. The government is now waiting for a Singaporean court to decide whether to accept Tannos’ challenge to Indonesia’s request for his extradition from the city-state. Indonesia is not alone in facing this challenge. Globally, the abuse of golden passport schemes has undermined efforts to prosecute transnational financial crimes.
What is worrying is that while countries like the United Kingdom and several EU states are moving to phase out or reform such programs, Indonesia may be inadvertently recreating similar vulnerabilities through its new push to attract foreign wealth. The government’s current promotion of “Family Office” as part of its economic strategy risks becoming a backdoor for anonymous wealth and asset shielding. Although family offices are generally framed as wealth management entities for ultra-rich families, they have been misused in several jurisdictions to obscure ownership structures, hide illicit funds and bypass tax obligations.
Without proper regulation and transparency, these mechanisms could mirror the very risks Indonesia seeks to combat. In light of these developments, Indonesia must urgently act on multiple fronts. First, it should align with international calls to prohibit the sale of citizenship through investment and tighten controls on investment-based residency. Second, any application for citizenship or long-term residency must undergo rigorous due diligence, including checks for corruption, money laundering and links to transnational crime. Third, our law enforcement institutions need stronger cross-border intelligence and cooperation mechanisms to track citizenship changes and pursue fugitives wherever they are. Strategic litigation and diplomatic engagement should be considered against states that knowingly provide safe haven to convicted or indicted individuals.
Fourth, our citizenship and identity systems must be actively monitored and cross-referenced with international watchlists. Passive data collection is no longer sufficient. Indonesia should take a leadership role in promoting transparency of citizenship schemes within forums like ASEAN, the Group of 20 and the United Nations Convention against Corruption. Finally, the establishment of family offices must be subject to a robust regulatory framework grounded in a risk-based approach. Full transparency of ownership and fund origins is nonnegotiable. Indonesia cannot afford to allow a new shadow system to emerge just as the world is beginning to shut the old one down. Tannos may have found a way to vanish from our legal system. But the real question is whether we are prepared to stop others from doing the same in the future.
This article was published in thejakartapost.com with the title “”. Click to read: https://www.thejakartapost.com/opinion/2025/08/06/tannos-golden-passports-and-the-price-of-impunity.html.
Leave a Reply