The next four years

On Wednesday evening, Law Commission at the parliament finally selected five commissioners to lead the Corruption Eradication Commission for the next four years. The new commissioners are Alexander Marwata, Saut Situmorang, Basaria Pandjaitan, Agus Rahardjo and La Ode Syarif. The next phase of this process will see the new commissioners presented to the President for their inauguration in the next 30 days, at the most.

The resolution to find KPK’s new helmers was reached with a voting, after the parliament (DPR) could not find consensus. All 54 members from various factions at the Law Commission participated in voting. Agus Rahardjo, former chief of the Procurement Policy Office (LKPP), bagged the majority of votes (53), successively followed by Basaria Pandjaitan (51 votes), Alexander Marwata (46 votes), La Ode Muhammad Syarif (37 votes) and Saut Situmorang (37 votes).

Five other candidates who missed out on the selection were former KPK speaker Johan Budi SP (25 votes), Robby Arya Brata (14 votes), Sudjanarko (3 votes) and Busyro Muqoddas (2 votes), while Surya Tjandra was ousted without any vote. There has been a lingering air of disappointment in public spheres after it was revealed that none of the candidates from KPK internal staffs could secure a commissioner seat. The public understand that in order to sustain KPK's process and continuity, the anti-graft body need experienced figures at the top that comprehend its inner workings.

After the first voting, the parliamentarians held another voting to choose the lead commissioner, which Agus Rahardjo swept in a landslide. Agus won with 44 votes, followed by Basaria Pandjaitan (9) and Saut Situmorang (1). No one voted for Alexander Marwata and La Ode Sjarif to lead the band.

During the three day fit and proper test at the Law Commission of DPR, several notes had drawn public interest. First, the parliament was seen to lack seriousness in probing the core values and mission of the candidate, which was apparent as many house members were missing from the sessions. Second, they failed to ask fundamental questions, particularly about candidate’s values and strategies for combating corruption. Instead they posed question related to the parliament’s own interests, like revision of the KPK Law – questions that basically called for the candidate’s commitment to the parliament should they be elected to lead KPK. And lastly, there was a palpable favoritism, which was evident in how several candidates were cornered while others commended. In addition, each candidate was allowed widely varying interview format and time allocation.

Factoring all of the above, it’s no wonder that Indonesia is disappointed with the parliament’s choices. Not to mention that candidates like Basaria and Alexander were already seeded by several factions, long before the voting. There’s a good chance that members of the Law Commission in DPR did not gave their votes objectively.

In reflection to the waves of attacks that hit KPK during 2015, such as attempts of criminalization and revision of the KPK Law, it would seem that in their corruption eradication journey for the next four years, KPK will still need to sail through some stormy water. Yet, despite all the lows, the public still have hopes and believe in KPK.

The public need to keep a tighter grip on KPK. Especially since almost all of the new commissioner line up expressed their consent in revision of KPK Law, in which DPR proposed a number of measures to silence KPK. The public must keep reminding them about the lurking threats behind this revision – potential threats that will quickly turn into calamity as soon as they approve DPR’s proposal. ***

Novanto elude sanctions with MKD ruses

Ethical courts held by the Parliamentary Council of Honor at the House of Representatives, DPR, against the house speaker Setya Novanto for his ethical breach in misrepresenting the President for profit, ended anticlimactically. MKD failed to issue any decisive ruling, let alone a sanction, against Novanto.

In each of their conclusions and standings, members of the council –MKD– asserted that Setya Novanto was convincingly proven to have breached the ethical codes in an either medium or severe violation. Nine MKD members found Novanto to have performed a medium violation and six others found his breach severe. With this composition, Novanto should have been handed a medium sanction, which according to DPR Regulation No. 2/2015 about MKD Procedures in article 63 letter (b) includes the dismissal from the post of house speaker.

Curiously, a number o MKD members, particularly ones that found him in severe violation, purportedly plays a scheme to secure Setya Novanto. The situation became suspicious since members that pushed for a severe sanction are strongly indicated of supporting Setya Novanto.

The notion of the court being a political drama instead of a mechanism of ethical enforcing gets even more glaring near the end of the trial, when instead of handing a sanction of any kind, the court merely read out Setya Novanto’s resignation letter. Analysts see the letter as a ploy by Novanto to avoid any ethical sanction from MKD.

In order to criticize the process of ethical enforcement at MKD DPR, a few notes must be observed. First, MKD as an institution failed to show any intention to uphold norms and ethics within DPR. This was evident as its members openly shielded their peers instead of uncovering aspects of ethical breach done by Novanto. Second, there was a conspicuously discriminative proceedings at the court, especially when it held an open examination for the whistle-blower and witnesses while arranging a closed examination for the accused, one of their own. Third, as MKD lacks courage to hand punishment for one of their own that breached the code of ethics, it would be pointless to lay any expectation on DPR’s internal mechanism to effectively uphold its own rules. Ideally, with their authorities, MKD could be an important instrument to revive DPR’s reputation and regain public trust.

Genuine enforcement of ethics becomes essential while DPR's functions and authorities are so susceptible to profiteering for personal or party interests. In order to build a genuine parliamentary institution that upholds integrity, it would be crucial to reorganize DPR's ethical infrastructures. Seeing the current process for with a board composed only by DPR members, it would be pointless to expect an independent and objective ethics enforcement at MKD. Public interests should also be represented at MKD to monitor parliamentarians ethical conducts, because DPR is not a professional body, it is the representatives of the people.

DPR also need to reorganize and tighten MKD's membership and procedural aspects, as well as the code of ethics itself - including measures against conflict of interest and trading of influence that implicate their members.***

WEEKLY SUMMARY

• DPR's Law Commission called to be more serious in selecting KPK leaders. antikorupsi.org/Zcq

• ICW launched The Mousetrap Frequency Vol.2 music compilation. antikorupsi.org/Zcc

• Frekuensi Perangkap Tikus Vol.2: Corruption eradication for all. antikorupsi.org/Zcp

• President asked to stand firm against KPK Law revision. antikorupsi.org/ZcG

• KPK destruction scheme from within. antikorupsi.org/ZcN

• KPK leader selection: DPR must use clear indicators. antikorupsi.org/Zcx

• On BPK ethical breach probe, ICW attend summon. antikorupsi.org/Zcf

• Voted KPK leaders disheartening. antikorupsi.org/ZcY

• Crowd gather to pickup Bambang Widjojanto from KPK. antikorupsi.org/Zcg

STATUS UPDATES

December 14

• Punia fund corruption case at the State Hindu Dharma Institute (IHDN) Denpasar began trials on two accused, Prof Dr I Made Titib (former rector) and Dr Praptini MPd (former general unit chief).

• Former Regent of Cilegon Tubagus Aat Syafaat, a suspect of corruption on Kubangsari Port construction on 2009 that amounted up to Rp 49m, was released after serving 3.5 years of his sentence.

December 15

• Chief of Bajawa State Attorney General in NTT filed for supreme appeal after eight accused walked free in the alleged corruption of Ngada Regent Regional Development Office construction project.

• The State Attorney General of Sidoarjo in East Java named two new suspects in a corruption of land compensation for victims of Lapindo mudflow in Gempolsari Village, subdistrict of Tanggulangin.

December 16

• Chief Technical Officer of PT Pelindo II, Ferialdi Noerlan, a suspect in corruption of ten mobile crane units procurement at the company, had his second questioning at the Police Criminal Investigation Unit (Bareskrim).

• Luhur Pambudi Mulyono, speaker of Purworejo Regent Representative Council (DPRD), was found not guilty in the alleged corruption of political support fund (banpol).

December 17

• Otto Cornelis Kaligis was handed a 5 year and 6 months prison sentence, plus a fine of Rp 300m or equal to an additional 4 months prison sentence.

• Mandra Naih, Director of PT Viandra Production, was sentenced to a year in prison and Rp 50m in fines.

• Ahmad Kirjauhari, former local parliamentarian of Riau in 2009-2014, was sentenced to four years in prison.

• Syaifullah Ali Imran, Branch Chief of Bank Sulselbar in Palopo who was an accused in the alleged bogus credit scheme was found not guilty at Makassar Corruption Court.

• Former Chairman of Maninjau Religion Court, Syamri Adnan, was implicated in the corruption of land acquisition for the local court house in 2007.

• Former local councilman at Garut Regent, Komar Mariuna and Budi Setiawan, were indicted with a 20 year incarceration for their involvement in corruption of junior high school (SMP) books procurement in 2010.

December 18

• Jakarta Police’s Special Crimes Unit accused three civil servants at Jakarta tax office of hotel tax corruption.

• Tripeni Irianto Putro, Chief of Medan Administrative Court, was sentenced to two years in prison as well as Rp 200m in fines after he was found guilty of taking bribes.