Thoughts about our future corruption eradication strategy

Thoughts about our future corruption eradication strategy Hendi Yogi Prabowo ; Director of the Center for Forensic Accounting Studies at the accounting program of the Islamic University of Indonesia, Yogyakarta. He obtained his Masters and PhD in Forensic Accounting from the University of Wollongong, Australia

JAKARTA POST,  02 Januari 2013

  

Earlier this month, the world celebrated Anticorruption Day as a reminder of our long and hard struggle for a corruption-free world for our children. On Dec. 3, the Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK) named the then youth and sports minister, Andi Mallarangeng as a suspect in the Hambalang sports complex graft scandal.  Corruption has been a major global problem for generations. Despite the various existing anticorruption measures, evidence suggests that more still needs to be done. A number of studies have been conducted to measure the severity of the problem to, among other things, see if anticorruption measures do make a difference. Recently, Transparency International released its 2012 Corruption Perception Index (CPI), which measures the perceived levels of public sector corruption in 176 countries. This year’s results show that corruption remains an entrenched part of the global public sector. This is partly indicated by the fact that around two-thirds of the surveyed countries in this year’s CPI received an index score of below 50 (out of 100). As for Indonesia, although it scores a little better compared to last year, it remains in the bottom 30 percent of the most corrupt countries in the world. The arrest of Andi is seen by many as a major achievement for the KPK, considering that it is the first time in its history that an active minister was named a suspect in a fraud case. Previously, a police general, Djoko Susilo also became the first active general to be named a suspect by the KPK in the driving simulator fraud case. The public sees these as evidence that the KPK remains uncompromised. The fight against corruption is an uphill battle in which the only way to win is with the commitment and collaboration of all members of society. The KPK, which is regarded as Indonesia’s ultimate weapon against corruption, is an essential part of this effort. Judging by the rise and fall of other anticorruption agencies all around the world, two of the most important prerequisites for a successful anticorruption body are independence and sufficient resources. Independence is measured in a number of ways, such as the existence of a legal basis, institutional placement, personnel recruitment and budget and fiscal autonomy. In terms of resources, it is important for an anticorruption institution to be sufficiently funded and properly staffed by capable individuals who possess the required skills. In the case of the KPK, despite its recent achievements in uncovering high-profile corruption cases in Indonesia, it is also known to have been suffering from a lack of funding and staffing. With corruptors seemingly able to regenerate on a daily basis, it will only be a matter of time before the KPK is overwhelmed by the number of fraud cases it must handle and eventually becomes ineffective. For this reason, it is important to strengthen the KPK by allocating more funding and capable staff for its operation. The eradication of corruption also means that we must ensure that it does not regenerate over time. This suggests that there is more to corruption eradication than just prosecuting the offenders. Just as with the eradication of other crimes, prevention should also become part of corruption eradication in Indonesia. Reducing the opportunities for corruption is the most common approach taken to minimize the occurrence of corruption, also known as the “situational crime prevention” approach. However, the fact that more and more corruptors emerge indicates that we need to focus on more than just the opportunity side. In practice, understanding the behavioral side of corruption is crucial in designing an effective anti-corruption strategy. For example, recent global surveys on fraud by Ernst & Young revealed that a large proportion of Indonesian respondents believed that bribery was a legitimate way of doing business. This alone indicates that there may be something with the way our generation perceives fraud and misconduct in society. Experts believe that this is caused by, among other things, the environment in which a person works where fraud is commonplace and eventually shapes how he perceives fraud. Some psychology experts even argue that a person’s acceptance of fraud and misconduct starts during their childhood (e.g. cheating on school exams). This is where education plays its role in shaping our future generation’s mindset so that when children grow up they will have a clear sense of right and wrong. Just as with other crime eradication efforts, corruption eradication must be conducted in a specific, measurable, attainable, relevant and timely (SMART) way. This is to say that there must also be some sort of “quality assurance” applied to corruption eradication activities.  “Specific” means that there is a clear goal for every corruption eradication program. The programs must also be “measurable” so that we know whether or not the predetermined objectives have been achieved. With regard to the existing resources and limitations, each program must be formulated with a goal that is “attainable” to those who will execute it.  “Relevant” means that that every goal set for every anticorruption program really does matter so that it will not end up as a waste of resources. Finally, there should be a clear timeline for the achievement of every anticorruption objective. In other words, we should know when to expect the results of the programs. In the science of crime eradication, it is generally known that in order to achieve the desired objectives, acquiring sufficient crime data is important for decision-making purposes. For example, in Australia, the Australian Bureau of Statistics issues national crime statistics to provide indicators of the level and nature of crime in the country. Such statistics are used to assess changes in crime over time and to formulate anti-crime strategies accordingly. Unfortunately, Indonesia is still far behind many other countries in terms of a comprehensive crime database and statistics, particularly in relation to fraud. It is more difficult in Indonesia (i.e. compared to Australia) to find information about national losses from a particular crime in a particular period of time. Obtaining court decisions, for example, can be a time consuming process whereas similar document can be easily obtained in other countries by means of Internet searches. This suggests that one of the priorities for future strategies in combating corruption in Indonesia should be building a comprehensive crime database. Corruption eradication has never been an easy task. In many cases, corruption investigation and prosecution can be a long and hard road full of ups and downs and it takes courageous people to carry on such a difficult task. However, the responsibility for preventing corruption lies on the shoulders of the entire nation from cities to villages, from country lanes to highways. As the message of world Anticorruption Day says; no matter how hard it has been and it is going to be, together we can put corruption on its knees. ●

Lawan Korupsi, Wawancara dengan Pimpinan KPK Bambang Widjajanto

MENYAMBUT INDONESIA 2012

Lawan Korups

Wawancara dengan Pimpinan KPK Bambang Widjajanto

Sumber : SINDO, 19 Desember 2011

Terpilihnya Dr. Bambang Widjojanto , SH, MH menjadi salah satu pimpinan Komisi Pemberantasan Korupsi (KPK) diyakini bisa membangun optimisme melawan korupsi di tengah kepercayaan publik kepada aparat penegak hukum mulai menurun.

Tak bisa dipungkiri, upaya pemberantasan korupsi terkesan hanya jalan di tempat. Itu sebabnya masuknya Bambang di lembaga ad hoc ini diharapkan bisa membawa angin segar bagi upaya pemberantasan korupsi di Tanah Air. Bagi Bambang, selain membangun optimisme,hal lain yang harus dilakukan oleh pimpinan KPK adalah menghilangkan sikap saling curiga. Pimpinan KPK harus bisa bekerja dengan baik dan lebih berkonsentrasi dengan tugas pemberantasan korupsi. Berikut petikan wawancara dengan Bambang Widjojanto dengan SINDO saat ditemui di Jakarta beberapa waktu lalu:

Upaya pemberantasan korupsi saat ini terkesan jalan di tempat. Pendapat Anda?

Kalau saya mau bilang begini,dengan maraknya kasus korupsi yang ada, harusnya optimisme tetap dihidupkan.Kalau orang sudah tidak optimistis, tidak ada lagi elemen kehidupan. Saya tidak akan mengeluh ini kurang itu atau pemberantasan korupsi jalan di tempat. Kita harus bijak. Harusnya dengan adanya keterbatasan yang ada, kita harus mengoptimalisasikannya. Jadi sekali lagi kita tetap harus optimis menjadikan Indonesia bebas korupsi.

Sampai kapan kita berharap Indonesia bisa bebas korupsi?

Memang kita tidak bisa mengelak jika sekarang ini kita berhadapan dengan situasi yang sudah sangat parah. Tetapi, itu tidak berarti membuat kita tidak optimistis. Kita harus yakin bahwa kita bisa. Sikap konsisten untuk terus berjuang juga sangat diperlukan.Kita harus hindari sikap-sikap pesimistis dan pragmatis. Menurut saya, ketika dalam situasi terdesak, mungkin sulit, tetapi di situlah justru konsistensi kita diuji. Justru di sinilah tantangannya.

Pandangan Anda, seburuk apa korupsi di Indonesia?

Kalau mengacu pada hasil survei Transparency International (TI) 2011 soal indeks persepsi korupsi Indonesia naik 0,2 poin. Jadi, sekarang 3,0. Dari titik itu harusnya kita mengapresiasi bahwa program-program korupsi diapresiasi baik oleh penyurvei. Satu itu harus diapresiasi. Kedua,seharusnya dengan apa yang kita punya saat ini harusnya lebih bagus lagi. Ini yang harus dilakukan untuk mengoptimalisasi semua sumber daya agar maksimal. Supaya kita lebih sistematik ke depan dalam pemberantasan korupsi.

Banyaknya pejabat yang korupsi, menurut Anda, faktor apa yang menjadikan mereka berbuat?`

Tentu saja penyebabnya ada banyak hal.Bisa jadi pejabat berbuat korupsi karena kebijakannya memang membuka ruang korupsi sendiri. Karena kebijakan itu sendiri potensial menciptakan korupsi.Bisa juga karena mekanisme pengawasan terhadap penyalahgunaan kewenangan tidak efisien tidak efektif. Bisa juga karena secara kelakuan (behavior) memang maunya nyolong, jadi itu yang harus dikontrol.

Tak bisa dipungkiri, banyak hambatan besar dalam upaya memberantas korupsi di Indonesia. Tanggapan Anda sendiri bagaimana?

Kalau saya melihatnya justru dengan problem yang besar itu merupakan tantangan tersendiri. Semakin banyak tantangan berarti ladang beramal kita juga besar. Mudah-mudahan kita bisa syahid di situ.Kalau orang mati syahid di situ kan mudah-mudahan diterima oleh Allah dengan sangat baik.

Ada yang ingin disampaikan setelah Anda ditetapkan sebagai wakil ketua KPK?

Harus diapresiasi lah ini kan hasil maksimal dari proses dan cara pemilihan dari DPR. Jadi harus diapresiasi. Poinnya hanya itu saja, harus diapresiasi.

Terkait program 100 hari prioritas yang akan dikerjakan nanti seperti apa?

Mungkin tidak bisa ukurannya 100 hari.Ukurannya adalah ada kasus-kasus yang sudah masuk dalam agenda KPK.Ini maksudnya yang sudah masuk dan dikerjakan KPK. Maka mudah-mudahan pimpinan KPK yang sekarang ini bisa merumuskan kira-kira kasus-kasus mana yang sudah bisa diselesaikan dan mana yang masih bermasalah. Jadi, harus ada hands note.

Tapi,pimpinan yang baru harus membuat prioritas, perlu membuat indikator, yang mana yang mendapat perhatian publik dan yang harus diselesaikan.Selain itu, perlu dirumuskan juga masalahnya di mana, apakah pembuktiannya yang kurang,s umber dayanya kurang, atau masalah lainnya. Kalau beban pembuktiannya berarti harus diinvestigasi lagi. Kalau jumlah SDM kurang, harus ditingkatkan. Itu nanti harus dilihat apa sih problemnya. Mudah-mudahan sudah ada identifikasi problemnya, sehingga strategi intervensinya bisa lebih sederhana lagi.

Lalu soal kasus-kasus besar,seperti Century, bagaimana nanti Anda menyelesaikan kasus tersebut?

Sekali lagi, harus kami identifikasi. Karena kasus besar kanbisa jadi karena medianya yang memberitakan terus. Jadi standarnya harus jelas dulu. Tapi, kalau bagaimana menyelesaikan kasus itu, kami harus melakukan kajian. Mudah-mudahan kajian yang sudah dilakukan oleh teman-teman terdahulu, pimpinan terdahulu, sudah dikerjakan dengan maksimal. Artinya kami tinggal mengeksekusi saja.

Anda dipilih lembaga politik DPR yang sudah pasti penuh kepentingan kabarnya, ada pihak berkepentingan dengan pimpinan KPK yang baru agar kasusnya aman?

Jangan terlalu curiga begitu. Kalau saya harus menghilangkan kecurigaan-kecurigaan seperti itu.Yang harus dibangun pimpinan KPK adalah trust building. Kalau Anda bekerja sama sudah punya persepsi faksionalisasi dan kecurigaan, itu tidak bisa kerja karena nanti pekerjaannya adalah mencurigai yang lain.

Apa yang akan Anda lakukan jika menghadapi kasus yang melibatkan politisi?

Kalau saya sederhana sekali. Harus dibangun komunikasi yang saling memperkuat. Kalau berdasarkan temuan-temuan kasus, fakta-fakta yang secara yuridis bahwa seseorang dinyatakan bersalah maka aturannya menyatakan harus dijalankan. Komunikasi untuk saling memperkuat dan mengingatkan harus dilakukan. Satu lembaga pengawasan dan satu lembaga penegak hukum harus bersinergi. ●