Money talks in April ballot printing contracts<\/p>\n
Moch. N. Kurniawan, Jakarta<\/p>\n
Officials from the General Elections Commission (KPU) argued in
\nApril that they lacked the money to better inform the public on
\nhow to properly cast their votes in the legislative election,
\nwhich may in part explain the fact that spoiled ballots accounted
\nfor some 11 million (9 percent) of the 125 million votes cast.<\/p>\n
However, over the last few months it has been suggested that a
\nlack of funding was not actually to blame. In fact, it is argued
\nthat there was originally plenty of money, but lack of due
\ndiligence in the selection of firms to print the ballot papers --
\nnot to mention suspected corruption and collusion -- inflicted
\nlosses on the state of billions of rupiah -- money that the KPU
\ndesperately needed to properly manage the elections.<\/p>\n
A senior executive with one of the winning bidders of a
\nprinting contract told The Jakarta Post that his firm still had
\nto pay bribes to the KPU officials in charge of ballot printing
\neven after the commission had made public the results of the
\npoll.<\/p>\n
The executive, who requested anonymity, said bribes were
\nnecessary to ensure timely payment from the KPU for the printing
\nwork.<\/p>\n
\"We just gave those in charge of the ballot printing extra
\nmoney. It's common,\" he said, but refused to reveal the amount of
\nmoney involved.<\/p>\n
The KPU selected 17 firms to print the 660 million ballot
\npapers for the April 5 election. Its final selection was supposed
\nto have been based on the printing machine capacity
\nspecifications submitted by the bidders. However, the commission
\nfailed to conduct any checks on the ground.<\/p>\n
The firms bidding for KPU contracts also tried to beat the
\ncompetition by fabricating the data they submitted to the
\ncommission.<\/p>\n
In the end, many of winning bidders turned out to be incapable
\nof meeting the printing deadlines, which caused chronic delays in
\nthe distribution of ballot papers. In some areas, the KPU had to
\ndelay the elections due to the late arrival of election
\nmaterials, such as ballot papers and ink.<\/p>\n
An investigation by the Post reveals that at least three firms
\n-- Winkarya Lintas Persada, Jenakarya Adi Indah and Dwi Rama --
\nout of the 17 winning firms did not have the necessary printing
\nmachinery, and had inflated their costs.<\/p>\n
A broker from another firm found to have subcontracted its
\nprinting work also acknowledged that bribery was involved in
\noiling the tender process.<\/p>\n
\"It's a common practice to cut through the red tape with money
\nin this country. Nobody can deny it,\" he told the Post.<\/p>\n
Earlier, an executive of another winning firm said that he had
\npaid hundreds of millions of rupiah to those in charge of the
\nballot paper printing tender.<\/p>\n
According to him, all of the printing firms had employed three
\napproaches in attempting to win the KPU contracts -- approaching
\nKPU members, the KPU secretariat, and the KPU logistics bureau.<\/p>\n
Yanto Lee, director of Winkarya, one of the successful
\nprinting companies, denied suggestions that his company was able
\nto print ballot papers for Rp 25 per color sheet, much lower than
\nthe Rp 45.8 the KPU had determined.<\/p>\n
\"We can print the ballot papers for between Rp 50 and Rp 60
\nper color sheet,\" he said, stressing that his firm had never
\nsubmitted fabricated data on its printing capabilities to the
\nKPU.<\/p>\n
He admitted that Winkarya had subcontracted out its printing
\nwork to another firm, Pentagraph, but said that this had been
\ndone with the KPU's consent.<\/p>\n
Jenakarya director Ave Prabawa said his firm's name had been
\nused by a broker when bidding for a ballot paper printing
\ncontract for the legislative elections. In return, Jenakarya was
\npaid Rp 15 million.<\/p>\n
\"We didn't print the ballot papers and we don't know which
\nfirms did,\" he said.<\/p>\n
Meanwhile, Edward, the production head of Dwi Rama, denied a
\nreport that his company did not have access to four color
\nprinting machines, unlike what it had told the KPU.<\/p>\n
He said the four color machines were owned by relatives of Dwi
\nRama's owner, who worked together with Dwi Rama.<\/p>\n
KPU member Mulyana W. Kusumah, who chaired the ballot paper
\ntender committee, said he had not seen any KPU officials
\ncolluding with printing firms, or helping them win contracts.<\/p>\n
He conceded that the commission had been unable to check out
\nall 17 of the winning firms and their facilities, arguing that
\nthe KPU was understaffed and short on time.<\/p>\n
To prevent a repeat performance, the KPU decided to appoint
\nprinting firms directly for the July 5 presidential election.<\/p>\n
Regarding the possibility of overpricing, KPU tender
\nconsultant Sentot Marjuki said the commission had made its own
\ncalculations and come up with a price of Rp 275 for six color
\nsheets -- or Rp 45.8 per sheet -- for the printing of ballot
\npapers of 40 cm x 65 cm and 55 cm x 80.5 cm. He claimed the KPU's
\nprice estimate was actually low.<\/p>\n
However, a number of the winning firms said they could print
\nsix-color ballot papers for between Rp 150 and Rp 180, or between
\nRp 25 and Rp 30 per color sheet.<\/p>\n
The cost of printing 660 million ballot papers, according to
\nthe KPU's figure of Rp 275 per color sheet, comes to Rp 184
\nbillion.<\/p>\n
However, if the price was Rp 180 per color sheet -- the
\nhighest figure quoted by the firms -- the cost would come to some
\nRp 120.5 billion. Thus, the potential losses to the state amount
\nto Rp 63.5 billion.<\/p>\n
The KPU, according to observers, enjoys the crucial attribute
\nof being trusted by the public at large; its members, many of
\nwhom are university lecturers, are quite likely to be regarded as
\ninexperienced -- but not corrupt. A further probe into the
\nselection of printing firms for the legislative elections would
\nhelp ensure that this trust is maintained.<\/p>\n
Investigation findings<\/p>\n
1. Winkarya Lintas Persada<\/p>\n
- Printer specification listed as 4-color, but a check<\/p>\n
revealed it to be 2-color<\/p>\n
- Submitted price of Rp 25 per color for 6-color ballots<\/p>\n
2. Dwi Rama<\/p>\n
- Printer specs listed as 4-color, but a check revealed it<\/p>\n
did not have color printers<\/p>\n
3. Jenakarya Adi Indah<\/p>\n
- under the \"Specifications for printers and price\" section,
\nit had<\/p>\n
entered: \"Refer to PT Nusantara Lestari\"<\/p>\n
Source: The Jakarta Post<\/p>\n
The above report was made possible with the support of the
\nCoalition for a Free and Fair Election.<\/p>\n
The writer is a journalist of The Jakarta Post.<\/p>", "url": "https:\/\/jawawa.id\/newsitem\/money-talks-in-april-ballot-printing-contracts-1447893297", "image": "" }, "sponsor": "Okusi Associates", "sponsor_url": "https:\/\/okusiassociates.com" }