Customs red tape<\/p>\n
Indonesian businesspeople often complain about the red tape at
\nthe customs service which delays clearance of goods, thereby
\nincreasing handling costs and disturbing industrial production
\nprocesses and plant construction. However, the outrage expressed
\nlast week by Amiruddin Saud, the chairman of the Indonesian
\nImporters Association, over what he disdainfully criticized as
\nextortion of bribes by customs officials should jolt the
\ngovernment into immediate action.<\/p>\n
Amiruddin distributed copies of official memos written by the
\nchief of the intelligence section of the customs service at the
\nJakarta port of Tanjung Priok to reporters to emphasize his
\npoint. Importers who got such memos -- there were 1,063 memos
\nissued in the first quarter of this year alone -- were required
\nto meet with the customs official in charge before their imports
\ncould be cleared.<\/p>\n
At those meetings, as Amiruddin recounted, importers were
\nforced to pay bribes or face the risk of having the memos
\nconverted into intelligence notes, which would authorize physical
\ninspection by customs officials. Physical inspection means delays
\nin clearance of goods and additional costs.<\/p>\n
This practice runs counter to the procedures introduced since
\nthe middle of 1985 when the corruption-ridden customs service was
\nstripped of its inspection authority and imports were subjected
\nto preshipment inspection by the officially-designated surveyor
\ncompany (initially Geneva-based Societe Generale de Surveillance,
\nor SGS, and later state-owned PT Surveyor Indonesia). Under the
\nsystem, which will be effective until July next year, imports
\nwhich are covered by Clean Reports of Finding from the surveyor
\ncompany's offices in the countries of origin or ports of loading
\ncan no longer be inspected by the customs service at the ports of
\nunloading, except in special cases when intelligence information
\nindicates high probability of violations of customs and import
\nregulations.<\/p>\n
The preshipment inspection system minimizes personal contacts
\nbetween importers and customs officials which are usually the
\nstarting points for collusion. However, the official memos
\nrequire importers to meet with customs officials to \"clarify
\nthings\". According to Amiruddin, it is at such meetings that
\nimporters are bullied into paying bribes under the threat of
\nhaving their imports subjected to physical inspection.<\/p>\n
As if all of this were not distressing enough, we were utterly
\ndisappointed at the response to these allegations from the
\nCustoms and Excise Tax Director General, Soehardjo, who
\nimmediately demanded evidence of bribery and the names of the
\nofficials taking bribes from importers. Surely Soehardjo knows
\nthat such bribes are paid in cash without any receipts.<\/p>\n
One would think that the customs director general would be so
\ndisgusted by the importers' complaints and allegations that he
\nwould act immediately and in good faith quietly investigate the
\nallegations.<\/p>\n
The big question is why the chief of the intelligence section
\nof the customs service at the Tanjung Priok port has written so
\nmany memos. Presidential Instruction No.3\/1991 on the preshipment
\ninspection system stipulates that only intelligence information
\nnotes mandate physical inspection and not memos. What is the
\npurpose of memos which require personal contacts between
\nimporters and customs officials?<\/p>\n
The director in charge of smuggling prevention and
\ninvestigations at the customs directorate general, Thomas
\nSugijata, acknowledged last week that even the intelligence
\nnotes, which are produced through a lengthy process, do not
\nalways result in the proof of wrongdoing on the part of the
\nimporter. Of the 122 intelligence notes his office alone served
\nto importers in the first quarter of this year as the basis for
\nphysical inspection, only 59 proved true in the sense that the
\ninspection uncovered violations of customs or import regulations.<\/p>\n
The problem is that importers whose imports are delayed by
\nphysical inspection cannot not claim compensation if the
\ninspection finds nothing wrong.<\/p>\n
We think it is most imperative for the customs director
\ngeneral to clean up his office during the one-year transition
\nperiod up to April, 1997, before the new customs law comes into
\neffect. Otherwise, the government clearly will have to continue
\nthe preshipment inspection system after the July expiry date.<\/p>",
"url": "https:\/\/jawawa.id\/newsitem\/customs-red-tape-1447893297",
"image": ""
},
"sponsor": "Okusi Associates",
"sponsor_url": "https:\/\/okusiassociates.com"
}