|
Questioning
the President’s role in saving the KPK
Mimin Dwi Hartono ; A Human Rights Activist, Coordinator of
SID-NET Indonesia
|
JAKARTA
POST, 09 Oktober 2012
The battle between the
Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK) and the National Police erupted again
when police investigators attempted to arrest KPK investigator Novel Baswedan
on Friday evening (Oct. 5). This incident was allegedly related to the KPK’s investigation
into corruption at the National Police Traffic Corps (Korlantas). Although the
police deny any such link, the correlation is undeniable and it is believed by
the public.
This is not the first time that polemics and feuding have arisen between the KPK and the National Police. In 2009, there was a criminalization of the commission’s leaders, known as “Gecko versus Crocodile”. The case was brought to an end when the Attorney General’s Office (AGO) issued in 2010 a deponeering (Indonesian version of a Dutch legal principle that allows the AGO to dismiss a legal case deemed not in the public interest).
The decision may not have been made but for the intervention of President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono following an outcry by millions of people who faithfully supported the KPK through direct social action and social media sites.
This time around, the clash was apparently sparked by the commission investigating an active general, which has never happened before. The KPK’s courage is admirable, though it later resulted in the withdrawal of KPK investigators that had been seconded to the antigraft body by the police.
Although the police spokesman maintained the withdrawals were merely tour of duty rotations, the public felt they were an attempt to disrupt the KPK.
As both the KPK and the National Police are law enforcement agencies, this ongoing feud is not desired by most Indonesians; although it is expected by those who are guilty of corruption.
Many people believe that only the President as head of state can deal with the polemics and the feuding but the public is becoming increasingly disappointed with the President for being so slow to respond to the issue.
It is true that it is not good and healthy for our democracy if the President is expected to interfere every time there is a problem, because there are presidential aides who are supposed to perform the task. However, it is a fact that only the President is capable of and authorized to settle the dispute.
The President should execute the mandate to eradicate corruption, which has become the enemy of the people and nation of Indonesia. The attitude and actions of the President in intervening, as during the case of “Gecko versus Crocodile”, would reflect state policy for the larger public interest by eradicating corruption and saving both the KPK and the National Police.
There were many anomalies in the police’s efforts to capture Novel Baswedan. Indeed, KPK deputy chairman Bambang Widjojanto said the move was a form of criminalization of KPK personnel.
Novel was allegedly responsible for abuse that resulted in the killing of a suspected thief in 2004 by Bengkulu Police.
However, why was this case made public eight years later, and precisely at the time that Novel was leading the investigation into the alleged corruption at Korlantas? Besides, the planned arrest of Novel was held late at night, well outside office hours, and it was carried out so suddenly. In fact, the plan should have been communicated in advance from the police to the KPK leaders so as not to cause turmoil and unrest in society.
It is therefore understandable if people view the police as behaving arrogantly and trying only to disrupt the work of the commission.
The open feud between the KPK and the National Police is not healthy; it is, in fact, unproductive for nation building. Post reform, the nation has conducted amendments to the Constitution, aimed at establishing “checks and balances” between state institutions in order to prevent abuses of power and a centralization of authority in a particular institution.
To that end, the establishment of new institutions, such as the KPK, the Judicial Commission and so on, has the aim of creating good and democratic governance.
However, the implementation is far from satisfactory because each institution has overlapping authority based on each separate institutional law. As a result, no synergy is developed; only competition, ignorance and blame among state institutions.
We do not like to see our President criticized by society for being irresolute and unable to take strategic action. However, as the head of state, he is expected to lead the way in combating corruption.
The President should stop issuing his usual rhetoric and statements that can be interpreted in a number of different ways. Regarding the Korlantas case, for example, it is clear that according to the KPK Law, Article 50, paragraphs 1, 2 and 3, the ultimate authority to investigate lies with the KPK.
To that end, the President should order the National Police chief to hand over the investigation of the case to the commission and support the KPK with all the facilities and infrastructure available. If there are alleged conflicts of interest, the President should then take stern action against the police chief.
It is time to enhance the anticorruption movement. The President must intervene in order to resolve this dispute. What is needed is firm action by the President to save the nation from rampant and acute corruption.
In the short term, the President needs to step in to mediate and take the best action to end the feud between the commission and the police. In the long term, he should lead the agenda for reviewing state regulations so that there is synergy between state institutions, especially on the anticorruption agenda. ●
This is not the first time that polemics and feuding have arisen between the KPK and the National Police. In 2009, there was a criminalization of the commission’s leaders, known as “Gecko versus Crocodile”. The case was brought to an end when the Attorney General’s Office (AGO) issued in 2010 a deponeering (Indonesian version of a Dutch legal principle that allows the AGO to dismiss a legal case deemed not in the public interest).
The decision may not have been made but for the intervention of President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono following an outcry by millions of people who faithfully supported the KPK through direct social action and social media sites.
This time around, the clash was apparently sparked by the commission investigating an active general, which has never happened before. The KPK’s courage is admirable, though it later resulted in the withdrawal of KPK investigators that had been seconded to the antigraft body by the police.
Although the police spokesman maintained the withdrawals were merely tour of duty rotations, the public felt they were an attempt to disrupt the KPK.
As both the KPK and the National Police are law enforcement agencies, this ongoing feud is not desired by most Indonesians; although it is expected by those who are guilty of corruption.
Many people believe that only the President as head of state can deal with the polemics and the feuding but the public is becoming increasingly disappointed with the President for being so slow to respond to the issue.
It is true that it is not good and healthy for our democracy if the President is expected to interfere every time there is a problem, because there are presidential aides who are supposed to perform the task. However, it is a fact that only the President is capable of and authorized to settle the dispute.
The President should execute the mandate to eradicate corruption, which has become the enemy of the people and nation of Indonesia. The attitude and actions of the President in intervening, as during the case of “Gecko versus Crocodile”, would reflect state policy for the larger public interest by eradicating corruption and saving both the KPK and the National Police.
There were many anomalies in the police’s efforts to capture Novel Baswedan. Indeed, KPK deputy chairman Bambang Widjojanto said the move was a form of criminalization of KPK personnel.
Novel was allegedly responsible for abuse that resulted in the killing of a suspected thief in 2004 by Bengkulu Police.
However, why was this case made public eight years later, and precisely at the time that Novel was leading the investigation into the alleged corruption at Korlantas? Besides, the planned arrest of Novel was held late at night, well outside office hours, and it was carried out so suddenly. In fact, the plan should have been communicated in advance from the police to the KPK leaders so as not to cause turmoil and unrest in society.
It is therefore understandable if people view the police as behaving arrogantly and trying only to disrupt the work of the commission.
The open feud between the KPK and the National Police is not healthy; it is, in fact, unproductive for nation building. Post reform, the nation has conducted amendments to the Constitution, aimed at establishing “checks and balances” between state institutions in order to prevent abuses of power and a centralization of authority in a particular institution.
To that end, the establishment of new institutions, such as the KPK, the Judicial Commission and so on, has the aim of creating good and democratic governance.
However, the implementation is far from satisfactory because each institution has overlapping authority based on each separate institutional law. As a result, no synergy is developed; only competition, ignorance and blame among state institutions.
We do not like to see our President criticized by society for being irresolute and unable to take strategic action. However, as the head of state, he is expected to lead the way in combating corruption.
The President should stop issuing his usual rhetoric and statements that can be interpreted in a number of different ways. Regarding the Korlantas case, for example, it is clear that according to the KPK Law, Article 50, paragraphs 1, 2 and 3, the ultimate authority to investigate lies with the KPK.
To that end, the President should order the National Police chief to hand over the investigation of the case to the commission and support the KPK with all the facilities and infrastructure available. If there are alleged conflicts of interest, the President should then take stern action against the police chief.
It is time to enhance the anticorruption movement. The President must intervene in order to resolve this dispute. What is needed is firm action by the President to save the nation from rampant and acute corruption.
In the short term, the President needs to step in to mediate and take the best action to end the feud between the commission and the police. In the long term, he should lead the agenda for reviewing state regulations so that there is synergy between state institutions, especially on the anticorruption agenda. ●
Tidak ada komentar:
Posting Komentar