SUMMARY
The objectives of the current study are: 1) to identify and analyze the authority of prosecutor as the executor of judge’s decision on the spoils resulting from criminal act of excise, 2) to find out and analyze the arrangements regarding the coordination of the prosecutor as the executor with the Director of Enforcement and Investigation/ Head of the Regional Office of the Directorate General of Customs and Excise related to the execution of the judge’s decision stating that the evidence is confiscated for the state in criminal act in the excise field. This study applies a qualitative approach and uses secondary and primary data as support. The results of the study show that: (1) the executive authority of the prosecutor to carry out court decisions that have permanent legal force in criminal cases is regulated in Articles 270 to 276 of the Criminal Procedure Code. The provisions of Article 270 of the Criminal Procedure Code are in line with the provisions described in Article 54 paragraph (1) of Law No. 48 of 2009 concerning Judicial Powers that the implementation of court decisions in criminal cases is carried out by prosecutor. Then, the implementation of court decisions in cases of criminal acts in the excise field still refers to the Criminal Procedure Code because the Excise Law does not specifically determine the party authorized to carry out the execution of state booty in excise crimes, (2) the execution of judge’s decision stating evidence confiscated for the state in a criminal act in the excise field does not include regulations regarding the coordination of the prosecutor as executor with the Director of Enforcement/Head of Regional Office of the Directorate of Customs and Excise Enforcement and Investigation.