A Asset seizure is an important instrument in civil procedural law to ensure the effectiveness of court decisions. however, in practice in indonesia, legal uncertainty often occurs due to incompletely updated seizure procedures, particularly in land ownership disputes. the main problem of this research is the similarities and differences between asset seizure mechanisms under indonesian and dutch civil procedural law, along with the normative implications of these differences, and identifying positive values ​​that can be applied in indonesia to the seizure procedure under civil procedural law. the research method used is normative legal research with a comparative legal approach and is descriptive and analytical. data were obtained from secondary legal materials in the form of legislation, legal literature, court decisions, and supported by interviews with legal practitioners. the results of the study indicate that although indonesia and the netherlands both view seizure as a means of protecting the rights of the parties, there are significant differences in procedural aspects, administrative standardization, and professionalism of implementers. the dutch system offers positive values ​​in the form of a preliminary permit mechanism, clear technical guidelines, and strengthening the principle of judicial prudence. these values ​​can be used as a reference in updating indonesian civil procedural law to increase legal certainty, protection of the rights of the parties, and the effectiveness of implementing asset confiscation.