National car Soeharto's mistake<\/p>\n
On Dec. 9, 1998 Soeharto, former president of the Republic of
\nIndonesia, was questioned by the investigators from the Attorney
\nGeneral's Office regarding, among other things, the national car
\nprogram. To make the matter clear, allow me to reveal the
\nfollowing:<\/p>\n
a. Two policies were implemented by the former president
\nregarding the national (Timor) car issue.<\/p>\n
The first was Presidential Decree No. 42\/1996, which regulated
\nthe technical policy allowing the importing of sedans from South
\nKorea. The concept was devised by former minister of industry and
\ntrade Tunky Ariwibowo.<\/p>\n
The second was Presidential Instruction No. 2\/1996, which
\ninstructed the minister of finance to grant PT Timor Putra
\nNasional (TPN) exemption from the import duty and the sales tax
\non luxury goods on the import of sedans from South Korea. The
\nconcept was devised by former minister of finance Mar'ie
\nMuhammad.<\/p>\n
b. In Presidential Instruction No. 2\/1996 it is stated that the
\ntax debts arising as a result of the importing of sedans from
\nSouth Korea by TPN will be borne by the state. This means that
\nthe state is extending a tax subsidy to TPN, obviously resulting
\nin the state incurring losses.<\/p>\n
c. Based on Article 23 of the 1945 Constitution, every year a
\ndraft budget of revenue and expenditure must be submitted by the
\ngovernment to the House of Representatives (DPR). All the state's
\nrevenue and expenditure must be listed in this draft budget and
\nthe draft budget must be ratified by the DPR. All subsidies
\nshould be included as spending (expenditure), for example the
\nfuel subsidy, the fertilizer subsidy and the subsidy for regional
\nautonomy.<\/p>\n
d. In reality the granting of a tax subsidy to TPN on the basis
\nof Presidential Instruction No. 2\/1996 has never been set forth
\nin the State Budget or in the supplementary State Budget ratified
\nby the House.<\/p>\n
e. So the policy as stipulated in Presidential Instruction No.
\n2\/1996 violated Article 23 of the 1945 Constitution, with respect
\nto both sub-article (1) because the tax subsidy was not included
\nin the State Budget and sub-article (2), because the tax law was
\nviolated (There is no tax-free facility whatsoever in the
\nprevailing tax law).<\/p>\n
f. So these presidential policies profited only TPN, 99 percent
\nof whose shares are controlled by Hutomo Mandala Putra, former
\npresident Soeharto's youngest son. In this respect the element of
\na criminal act of corruption based on Law No. 3\/1971, namely
\n\"violating the law, inflicting losses on the state and benefiting
\noneself or another party\" is conclusive. Obviously, there was
\ncorruption, collusion and nepotism.<\/p>\n
It is up to the attorney general to draw his own conclusion.
\nAlso it is up to him whether or not to prosecute former president
\nSoeharto on the basis of Law No. 3\/1971.<\/p>\n
Finally Mar'ie Muhammad, former minister of finance, must be
\nsummoned as a witness.<\/p>\n
SUHARSONO HADIKUSUMO<\/p>\n
Jakarta<\/p>", "url": "https:\/\/jawawa.id\/newsitem\/national-car-soehartos-mistake-1447893297", "image": "" }, "sponsor": "Okusi Associates", "sponsor_url": "https:\/\/okusiassociates.com" }