The House of Representatives legislation body (Baleg) on Wednesday agreed to continue discussing the amendment of Law No. 30/2002 on the Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK), following support it received from most of the House’s political party factions.
In a plenary meeting on Wednesday, nine parties agreed to amend the 2002 KPK Law while the Gerindra Party remained the only faction that has rejected the idea since it started to be discussed last year (http://www.thejakartapost.com/news/2016/02/10/house-proceeds-with-kpk-law-amendment.html).
“Today, we presented results of the harmonization of the draft KPK Law revision, which will be discussed in the House deliberative body [Bamus] meeting on Thursday,†Baleg deputy chairman Firman Subagyo told journalists after the meeting in Senayan, Central Jakarta (10/2/2015).
Discussions about the revisions took place on Monday and 12 points emerged. One was about the antigraft body’s authority to issue investigation termination warrants (SP3) and another was about a rule to prevent the KPK from recruiting investigators independently.
Prosperous Justice Party (PKS) faction member Al Muzzamil Yusuf criticized Articles 32 and 36 of the draft revisions. “These two articles do not stipulate clear rules on the prohibition against KPK commissioners from resigning before the end of their terms of office if they aim to run for a public position,†Muzzamil said.
The PKS and eight other factions, namely the Indonesian Democratic Party of Struggle (PDI-P), the Hanura Party, the Golkar Party, the Democratic Party, the National Awakening Party (PKB), the National Mandate Party (PAN), the United Development Party (PPP) and the NasDem Party, supported that there be further discussions about the revisions. Results of the Bamus meeting on Thursday (11/2/2015) will need approval from House members during a plenary meeting to be held shortly afterward.
After receiving a Presidential Mandate (Ampres) from President Joko "Jokowi" Widodo, the Baleg established a special committee to discuss the amendments.
PDI-P faction member Ichsan Soelistio became the only lawmaker supporting the amendments who showed up at the Baleg's plenary meeting. The KPK Law draft revision is one of priority bills listed on the 2016
National Legislation Program (Prolegnas).
As many as 45 House members support the amendments to the KPK Law. They comprise 15 members of the PDI-P faction, 11 members of the NasDem Party faction, nine members of the Golkar Party faction, five members of the PPP faction, three members of the Hanura Party faction and two members of the PKB faction.
The Indonesian Democratic Party of Struggle (PDI-P) insisted on Tuesday that it would not alter a draft revision to Law No.30/2002 on the Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK) despite vociferous opposition. As the prime driver of the KPK Law revision, the party remains firmly in support of the plan.
As reported earlier, the current KPK Law draft revision numbers four amendment points. First, it mandates the establishment of an oversight council to monitor the antigraft body’s performance. Second, the KPK will be given the authority to issue investigation termination warrants for corruption cases. Third, any wiretapping conducted by the KPK will have to have a permit from the oversight council. Fourth, the KPK will not be allowed to recruit its own investigators.
Earlier, experts warned President Joko “Jokowi†Widodo and the PDI-P to be careful with the planned revision of the 2002 KPK Law. Indonesian Institute of Sciences (LIPI) political expert Ikrar Nusa Bakti said the revision could weaken the commission, and in turn degrade public trust in both Jokowi and the PDI-P, with the party’s current popularity, having emerged triumphant in 2014’s legislative elections, at risk.
“If the KPK Law continues to be pushed, a perception of the PDI-P could emerge as the party that gave birth to, and killed, the KPK,†said Ikrar during a press conference to explain the results of a survey commissioned by pollster Indikator Politik Indonesia in Jakarta on Monday. The KPK was established in 2002 by then president Megawati Soekarnoputri, who chairs the PDI-P.
Based on the pollster’s survey results, public confidence level in political parties in Indonesia has continuously declined in the past year, dropping to 39.2 percent in January from 50.1 percent in the same month last year. Indikator researcher Hendro Prasetyo said the decline was due to several factors, one of which was the planned KPK Law revision, which the public considered contrary to the ethos of corruption eradication (http://www.thejakartapost.com/news/2016/02/09/pdi-p-bullish-over-kpk-law-revision.html).
The Urgency of Revision on KPK Law
The current KPK Law draft revision numbers four amendment points. First, it mandates the establishment of an oversight council to monitor the antigraft body’s performance. Second, the KPK will be given the authority to issue investigation termination warrants for corruption cases. Third, any wiretapping conducted by the KPK will have to have a permit from the oversight council. Fourth, the KPK will not be allowed to recruit its own investigators.
Talking about the mandates of an oversight council to monitor KPK performance is a good idea. An oversight council must be filled or stuffed with a credible person who come from several stakeholder such as mass media, NGO, religious figure, academia, lawyer, intelligent officer etc. An oversight council must be sworn and they must be punished if they’re leaking information on KPK operation.
KPK must be monitored because these body has bigger authority to eradicating corruption. Furthermore, KPK has vulnerability to abusing their authority for their purpose. We hope with the presence of an oversight council, KPK performance will more better than whatever their achieved before.
Meanwhile termination warrants for corruption is must realize because with termination warrants, public can also monitor KPK achievement on corruption cases which they’re handled. Besides that, for the defendent or inmates on corruption cases has know when their case will be finished. These rules is mean as a challenge for KPK to raise up their capability to complete a corruption case before dateline.
The idea of any wiretapping conducted by the KPK will have to have a permit from the oversight council has a purpose to avoid KPK power abuse. Therefore, the plan of KPK wiretapping just only presenced on minimum participant to avoid a leak of plan wiretapping, including if its leak happen we will easy to get “scapegoatâ€.
But the idea of the KPK will not be allowed to recruit its own investigators is a bad one and its has tend to weaken KPK. Recruiting investigators must be given to KPK itself, because if we’re wrong to choose investigators, it will be aggravated KPK operation.
Actually, a special idea at revision on the KPK law is death sentence or death penalty for the corruptor. The idea will be supported by people because corruption is an extra ordinary crimes like terrorist or separatist. Besides that, the corruptor is a brazen one too because they’re abusing our mandate which given to them before. Therefore, there is no other suitable sentence for corruptor unless they were executed because they had betrayed the trust of the people. Hopefully.
*). The writer earned his master from the University of Indonesia. Residing in Jakarta.
COPYRIGHT © ANTARA News Megapolitan 2016
In a plenary meeting on Wednesday, nine parties agreed to amend the 2002 KPK Law while the Gerindra Party remained the only faction that has rejected the idea since it started to be discussed last year (http://www.thejakartapost.com/news/2016/02/10/house-proceeds-with-kpk-law-amendment.html).
“Today, we presented results of the harmonization of the draft KPK Law revision, which will be discussed in the House deliberative body [Bamus] meeting on Thursday,†Baleg deputy chairman Firman Subagyo told journalists after the meeting in Senayan, Central Jakarta (10/2/2015).
Discussions about the revisions took place on Monday and 12 points emerged. One was about the antigraft body’s authority to issue investigation termination warrants (SP3) and another was about a rule to prevent the KPK from recruiting investigators independently.
Prosperous Justice Party (PKS) faction member Al Muzzamil Yusuf criticized Articles 32 and 36 of the draft revisions. “These two articles do not stipulate clear rules on the prohibition against KPK commissioners from resigning before the end of their terms of office if they aim to run for a public position,†Muzzamil said.
The PKS and eight other factions, namely the Indonesian Democratic Party of Struggle (PDI-P), the Hanura Party, the Golkar Party, the Democratic Party, the National Awakening Party (PKB), the National Mandate Party (PAN), the United Development Party (PPP) and the NasDem Party, supported that there be further discussions about the revisions. Results of the Bamus meeting on Thursday (11/2/2015) will need approval from House members during a plenary meeting to be held shortly afterward.
After receiving a Presidential Mandate (Ampres) from President Joko "Jokowi" Widodo, the Baleg established a special committee to discuss the amendments.
PDI-P faction member Ichsan Soelistio became the only lawmaker supporting the amendments who showed up at the Baleg's plenary meeting. The KPK Law draft revision is one of priority bills listed on the 2016
National Legislation Program (Prolegnas).
As many as 45 House members support the amendments to the KPK Law. They comprise 15 members of the PDI-P faction, 11 members of the NasDem Party faction, nine members of the Golkar Party faction, five members of the PPP faction, three members of the Hanura Party faction and two members of the PKB faction.
The Indonesian Democratic Party of Struggle (PDI-P) insisted on Tuesday that it would not alter a draft revision to Law No.30/2002 on the Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK) despite vociferous opposition. As the prime driver of the KPK Law revision, the party remains firmly in support of the plan.
As reported earlier, the current KPK Law draft revision numbers four amendment points. First, it mandates the establishment of an oversight council to monitor the antigraft body’s performance. Second, the KPK will be given the authority to issue investigation termination warrants for corruption cases. Third, any wiretapping conducted by the KPK will have to have a permit from the oversight council. Fourth, the KPK will not be allowed to recruit its own investigators.
Earlier, experts warned President Joko “Jokowi†Widodo and the PDI-P to be careful with the planned revision of the 2002 KPK Law. Indonesian Institute of Sciences (LIPI) political expert Ikrar Nusa Bakti said the revision could weaken the commission, and in turn degrade public trust in both Jokowi and the PDI-P, with the party’s current popularity, having emerged triumphant in 2014’s legislative elections, at risk.
“If the KPK Law continues to be pushed, a perception of the PDI-P could emerge as the party that gave birth to, and killed, the KPK,†said Ikrar during a press conference to explain the results of a survey commissioned by pollster Indikator Politik Indonesia in Jakarta on Monday. The KPK was established in 2002 by then president Megawati Soekarnoputri, who chairs the PDI-P.
Based on the pollster’s survey results, public confidence level in political parties in Indonesia has continuously declined in the past year, dropping to 39.2 percent in January from 50.1 percent in the same month last year. Indikator researcher Hendro Prasetyo said the decline was due to several factors, one of which was the planned KPK Law revision, which the public considered contrary to the ethos of corruption eradication (http://www.thejakartapost.com/news/2016/02/09/pdi-p-bullish-over-kpk-law-revision.html).
The Urgency of Revision on KPK Law
The current KPK Law draft revision numbers four amendment points. First, it mandates the establishment of an oversight council to monitor the antigraft body’s performance. Second, the KPK will be given the authority to issue investigation termination warrants for corruption cases. Third, any wiretapping conducted by the KPK will have to have a permit from the oversight council. Fourth, the KPK will not be allowed to recruit its own investigators.
Talking about the mandates of an oversight council to monitor KPK performance is a good idea. An oversight council must be filled or stuffed with a credible person who come from several stakeholder such as mass media, NGO, religious figure, academia, lawyer, intelligent officer etc. An oversight council must be sworn and they must be punished if they’re leaking information on KPK operation.
KPK must be monitored because these body has bigger authority to eradicating corruption. Furthermore, KPK has vulnerability to abusing their authority for their purpose. We hope with the presence of an oversight council, KPK performance will more better than whatever their achieved before.
Meanwhile termination warrants for corruption is must realize because with termination warrants, public can also monitor KPK achievement on corruption cases which they’re handled. Besides that, for the defendent or inmates on corruption cases has know when their case will be finished. These rules is mean as a challenge for KPK to raise up their capability to complete a corruption case before dateline.
The idea of any wiretapping conducted by the KPK will have to have a permit from the oversight council has a purpose to avoid KPK power abuse. Therefore, the plan of KPK wiretapping just only presenced on minimum participant to avoid a leak of plan wiretapping, including if its leak happen we will easy to get “scapegoatâ€.
But the idea of the KPK will not be allowed to recruit its own investigators is a bad one and its has tend to weaken KPK. Recruiting investigators must be given to KPK itself, because if we’re wrong to choose investigators, it will be aggravated KPK operation.
Actually, a special idea at revision on the KPK law is death sentence or death penalty for the corruptor. The idea will be supported by people because corruption is an extra ordinary crimes like terrorist or separatist. Besides that, the corruptor is a brazen one too because they’re abusing our mandate which given to them before. Therefore, there is no other suitable sentence for corruptor unless they were executed because they had betrayed the trust of the people. Hopefully.
*). The writer earned his master from the University of Indonesia. Residing in Jakarta.
Editor : M. Tohamaksun
COPYRIGHT © ANTARA News Megapolitan 2016