Anti-Corruption Weekly Digest: Update 2015 August 18-21
WEEKLY SUMMARY
Tuesday, August 18, 2015
The Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK) and Indonesia Corruption Watch (ICW) criticized the policy taken by Ministry of Law and Human Rights to award remissions or cutbacks of prison time for 1,938 from a total of 2,786 corruption convicts which will undermine the deterrent effect in an extraordinary crime.
The corruption case implicating the Regent of Musi Banyuasin Pahri Azhari and his wife Lucianty, in an alleged bribery to local city councilmen, again showed that family strongholds still unable to thwart corruption.
The Press Board ruled that Kompas and Tempo did not violate any press ethic codes in coverages as complained by Romli Atmasasmita, while The Jakarta Post was considered to violate the principles of cover both sides. This ruling proved that the case does not have any criminal dimension.
A potential of maladministration in management of village funds emerged after many villages are revealed to have not complete drafting of technical regulations about the usage and accountability of village funds.
Wednesday, August 19, 2015
The Selection Panel for KPK Leadership (Pansel KPK) acknowledged that candidates having questionable track records are still found among the remaining 19 aspirants who have passed previous selection phases. Pansel KPK will scrutinize records provided by the Financial Transaction Reports and Analysis Center (PPATK), ICW, as well as law enforcement offices, like KPK, the Attorney General and the Police.
The fifth President of RI, Megawati Soekarnoputri, hoped that KPK would end its roles after corruption no longer exist in Indonesia.
ICW revealed that during the first semester of 2015, corruption crimes were only sentenced to 2 years and 1 month imprisonment, on average. The number is worse than the previous years average of 2 years and 6 months.
KPK consider the pretrial measures taken by senior advocate Otto Cornelis Kaligis as a common legal procedures routinely taken by any corruption suspects. Meanwhile, KPK had submitted Kaligis' case files to Jakarta Corruption Court.
Thursday, August 20, 2015
Sutan Bhatoegana was sentenced to 10 years in prison plus a fine of Rp 500m or another year in prison in the case involving bribery and gratification. However he refused to be convicted alone and requested KPK to also question and legally process his former colleagues at Commission VII who he claims have received bribes.
The Supreme Court (MA) and the Attorney General Office (AGO) were unconcerned about a recent study by ICW concerning the dwindling corruption verdicts during the first semester of 2015. They maintained that the charges and verdicts on corruption suspects have been accurate and abide by the principles of justice.
MA have sent a memo to the Judicial Commission (KY) to defend Judge Sarpin Rizaldi and refuse to sentence Sarpin as recommended by KY.
Friday, August 21, 2015
Pansel KPK reserve a special attention on two candidates for KPK leaders who have suspicious financial transaction, as reported by PPATK.
During a period of 12 months, the Constitutional Court (MK) have established themselves as the sole interpreter and guardian of the constitution. However, in a number of cases, the verdicts issued by MK are not completely free from controversies.
KEY DEVELOPMENTS
August 18
- Regent of Musi Banyuasin and wife implicated in bribery
- Press Board rule out Kompas and Tempo from ethical violations
- Pretrial hearing held on Kaligis appeal
August 19
- Deadline of KPK leader candidates track record inputs set for Friday
- Sutan Bhatoegana sentenced to 10 years in prison and Rp 500m in fines
- Kaligis first hearing at Corruption Court set for Thursday
August 20
- Bhatoegana demand KPK to examine Commission VII colleagues over alleged bribery
- KPK took over case of Madiun Market involving Rp. 76m from AGO
- Sarpin refuse to retract his defamation lawsuit against two KY commissioners
- Corruption Court delay Kaligis' first hearing due to illness
August 21
- Gov reject mega-project proposal from parliament
- MK appealed to hold hearing about 12-year compulsory education program in education law
- ICW urge Pertamina to sell cheaper the overpriced 12-kg LPG
- MA officially reject KY recommendation to punish judge Sarpin
IN-DEPTH ANALYSIS
In The Absence of A Deterrent Effect
A few days ago, Indonesia Corruption Watch (ICW) published a study on verdicts issued by the corruption court in various prosecutions during the first semester of 2015. This study arranged its analysis into several points of discussion.
Firstly, ICW intended to generally classify corruption verdicts into three categories: light, average and heavy offenses. Second, to observe whether corruption verdicts have a unifying standard or a level of consistency between cases, particularly concerning any common substance, such as the amount of state loss between cases. In addition, ICW also seek to reveal whether corruption verdicts at any stage – at district court, appellate or supreme review – are integrated into a combined effort to recover state losses from corruption crimes.
ICW's findings concluded that corruption verdicts in 217 cases do not bear any deterrent effect, since the courts only sentence corruption crimes to 2 years and 1 month imprisonment, on average. The average verdict have shrunk considerably compared to the previous year during the first semester of 2014 when the average was 2 years and 9 months. Likewise, the courts do not regard financial compensation as a means to recover state loss from corruption.
Finally, ICW also noted a disparity in verdicts. Case in point, on two corruption cases with a significant difference on state loss, each panel of judges gave a similar weight of verdicts. In contrast, some cases with comparable state loss could be punished with significantly different weight of verdicts.
(http://nasional.news.viva.co.id/news/read/432831/icw--vonis-pengadilan-tipikor-masih-ringan)
Regrettably, the Supreme Court (MA) would not considered this study as a welcome input. The Chief Justice at MA, Hatta Ali, maintained that judges have the independence to give out verdicts depending on the severity of each case, be it light, average, or heavy offenses. He added that judges are not executioners that have to heavily punish all cases that they preside over. Rather, he claimed that corruption verdicts tend to be heavier at supreme appeal (kasasi) compared to the district court or appellate court.
(http://www.hukumonline.com/berita/baca/lt55d565d482d6a/ketua-ma--hakim-jangan-emosional-vonis-kasus-korupsi)
Apparently, a crucial point escaped the attention of the Chief Justice Hatta Ali. The issue raised by ICW with this study was not merely to underline a trend of lightweight verdicts, but more than that, this study reflect the failure of the courts to perform its functions in constructing a deterrent effect for corruption criminals. Surely, a deterrent effect in this context should not be simply manifested with heavier sentences – what with the executive having an authority to grant remission (sentence cutbacks) during a convict's time in prison – but more importantly with an improved effort to recover state assets.
ICW findings revealed that only 99 verdicts were accompanied by an order of restitution for corruption convicts, compared to the other 169 verdicts that neglected restitution. This prove that the courts are too lenient on corruption crimes. It is therefore crucial to keep in mind that the heart of corruption is money. Without a concerted effort to reclaim every cent stolen, then corruption will continue to have a breeding ground.***
Dissolving KPK
The perpetual discourse about dissolution of the Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK) have recently resurfaced. This time, the statement emanated from the Chairwoman of the Democratic Party of Struggle (PDIP) Megawati Soekarnoputri during her speech at the Constitution Day Seminar held by the People's Assembly or MPR (18/8).
Megawati was reading a text for her speech. But not being rigid, she also expressed points not written in the text. Among her improvisations was a point about the dissolution of KPK. Crucially, she declared that when corruption cease to exist, KPK can be dissolved. She argued, KPK would no longer be required as it is temporary in nature (ad-hoc).
http://news.detik.com/berita/2995010/ini-kutipan-pidato-megawati-yang-singgung-pembubaran-kpk
http://news.detik.com/berita/2994520/ini-pidato-lengkap-megawati-di-peringatan-hari-konstitusi
Her statement provoked strong reactions in news coverages as well as the social media. The hash-tags #BubarkanKPK (dissolve KPK) and #Mega immediately became worldwide trending topics in Twitter. In the news, a number of sourcepersons consider Megawati's statement to be inappropriate, while others consider this a normal statement.
The response on this discourse got even stronger after PDIP faction in the parliament (DPR) became inflamed. The assumed that the media had twisted their chairwoman's statement. They were further infuriated with news coverages that wrote Megawati wants to dissolve KPK. The PDIP faction even consider taking legal action against a number of media outlets that they believe had written inaccurate coverages that are detrimental to the image of Megawati.
Regardless of any intention behind Megawati's statement, the public should be made aware of several crucial points. First of all, regarding the functions and duties of KPK. Indeed, the duties of KPK is not limited to prosecutions. KPK is mandated with other functions, including -but not limited to- prevention, monitoring, coordination and supervision of the national corruption eradication efforts. Therefore, it would be wise to avoid giving public statements about the dissolution of KPK.
The other consideration in this point is the fact that a true national corruption eradication effort requires the hands of KPK. The public continue to place high expectations on KPK. This was reflected by the sheer amount of public reports on corruption allegations submitted to KPK. During the first semester of 2015 alone, KPK have received 3,020 public reports.
http://acch.kpk.go.id/rekapitulasi-pengaduan-masyarakat
The second point, it would be incorrect to say that KPK is temporary in nature (ad-hoc). According to the Law, KPK is an compulsory independent body that have to exist in Indonesia. Particularly, after Indonesia had ratified the United Nations Convention Against Corruption (UNCAC) with Law No. 7 of 2006 which, among its mandates, require Indonesia to have a special body to fight corruption.
Coincidentally, there is no article in the Law which states that KPK is an ad-hoc body (temporary). Nor is there any provision that regulate the life span of KPK. It is important to note that the formation and dissolution of any state institution such as KPK must be regulated by Law.
The third point, as a party built on a democratic platform, PDIP's maneuver to take legal action against the media – the fourth pillar of democracy – is best avoided in the current era of democracy. Advisedly, the PDIP faction should use a press mechanism to respond to media outlets they consider to be writing inaccurate stories. In case of stalemate, they can use a dispute mechanism provided by the Press Board to resolve their grievances. Furthermore, one of the media outlets in question have already retract their story and submit their apologies for the coverage.
And the last point; under the current corruption-crisis condition, the position of KPK needs to be strengthened, and not vice versa, to be weakened – or disbanded. Did President Joko Widodo not promised to strengthen KPK as part of his administration's agenda, the Nawa Cita?***
BAGIKAN
