Seized Bitcoin Is Not Yet Justice, by Fransiscus Nanga Roka

An incredible enforcement success is the recovery of billions in Bitcoin. The more difficult task is restoring dignity and freedom to the victims, and returning their lost savings. And governments should not mix up what they both do.

U.S. prosecutors in Brooklyn on Oct 14, 2025 announced charges against Chen Zhi, founder and chairman of Cambodia-based Prince Holding Group, alongside a civil forfeiture action ovel $15 billion worth of Bitcoin already-within U.S. control (approx as of time of action: 127,271 BTC). This was the largest forfeiture action ever brought by DOJ, it was not a completed forfeiture judgment or a tenable worldwide historical record.

Investigators say Chen oversaw forced-labor facilities, where captive workers armed with computers operated cryptocurrency investment scams around the world. The claimed business called for emotional manipulation, investment fraud and intimidation: one gang shed its cash as well as the other lost its freedom. These charges are to be proved, their seriousness should be investigated.

In January 2026 Chen was extradited from Cambodia to China. Elsewhere, a U.S. court order issued September 30 dealt with procedural squabbles in the Bitcoin forfeiture case, reiterating that merely possessing an asset does not determine who it belongs to or what they are owed for it.

The nature of the case reveals an unsettling alternative: that a seemingly legitimate corporation can provide both infrastructure and respectability to basic industrial-level exploitation. The formal registration of corporations, and/or the ownership of a high value property, along with complex financial arrangements should not be sufficient evidence to exceed the scrutiny.

The purported laundering is indicative of the difficulty, rather. Court documents describe “spraying” funds to many different wallets before “funneling” them together, and attempt to mix profits through gambling and cryptocurrency mining. Investigation is not just proving that everything a defendant has done where there was at least one link to cash is criminal.

The motive is profit. A splintered mix of control and command around the conditions is supervision, with obscured purview and complementing overseers between victims and perpetrators. Enforcement must confront all three.

The first step you should take is to make available an international claims process for victims. Publish criteria for eligibility, standards of proof/evidence and feasible dates in local languages. Separate participation in forfeiture proceedings from any later restitution or remission procedure. Survivors should not require specialized U.S. counsel just to be able to understand their choices.

Second, prevent victimization of individuals who are forced to commit the scams. Before considering workers to be paid assess offenders. At the centre of the response are safety, medical care, legal aid & protection against retaliation.

Third, look at financial and professional enablers. Where there is evidence of intending assistance or such legally actionable failings, banks, exchanges, property intermediaries and corporate-service providers ought to be investigated. An illustrious client’s affluence is an invitation to doubting, not deferment of judgment.

Fourth, organize multi-jurisdiction prosecutions and asset recovery. Evidence-sharing and cooperation between China and other countries will be especially consequential given Chen’s transfer there. Legitimate accountability, survivors protection or access to more resources must not be hampered by diplomatic rivalry.

Fifth, make asset management transparent. In line with evidence requirements, authorities should detail custody safeguards and the legal basis for disposal or dispersal. Delays without explanation are a material issue made worse by bitcoin price volatility.

Finally, protect due process. In such cases, the government needs to establish forfeiture grounds, not dismiss valid ownership claims and stop treating allegations as proof of guilt. Robust protections bolster confidence in recovery.

A record balance in a government wallet will not be the defining accomplishment. It is they who will be safe to live, victims who will receive amenable compensation and exploitative businesses who have facilitated their abuse will ground to a halt.

So, until then, Bitcoin that has been seized is an unfulfilled promise.

Fransiscus Nanga Roka

Faculty of Law University 17 August 1945 Surabaya and Managing Partner Law Firm Victorious Indonesia