Akbar's verdict will not help in fight against corruption
Akbar's verdict will not help in fight against corruption
Berni K. Moestafa, The Jakarta Post, Jakarta
The sentencing of the House of Representatives speaker to
three-years jail in a country where corruption is rife may seem
like a milestone, but critics say the verdict lacks the punch
needed to raise the fight against corruption to new levels.
Anticorruption activists Bambang Widjojanto and Teten Masduki
said the sentence handed down by the Central Jakarta District
Court to House speaker Akbar Tandjung for stealing Rp 40 billion
(US$4.4 million) from the state provided little disincentive for
would-be corruptors.
"It (the verdict) may have been unexpected but it hasn't met
the public's sense of justice," Indonesian Corruption Watch (ICW)
chairman Teten said on Friday.
"There is nothing in Akbar's verdict that would deter other
people from committing the same crime," said Bambang, former
chairman of the Indonesian Legal Aid Institute (YLBHI).
He said not only was Akbar's sentence pitifully short of the
20-year maximum, but the judges also let him walk free while his
appeal is processed. A final verdict could take months or even
years.
In March, central bank governor Sjahril Sabirin was sentenced
to three-years prison, but never jailed. He was acquitted by the
High Court last week.
He and Akbar are among the privileged few who may enjoy
freedom as convicted criminals, while ordinary people are often
jailed immediately.
Bambang expressed doubt that Akbar's trial marked a turning
point in netting more high-profile corruptors.
Widespread corruption has been slowing the government's
efforts to woo investments in a country which badly needs an
injection of foreign capital. About eight million people have
entered the job market recently as the country battles to revive
its flagging economy.
The People's Consultative Assembly decree VIII/2001 required
corruption be treated as an extraordinary crime. But the three-
year verdict against Akbar was anything but extraordinary, said
Bambang.
"Judges should have taken account of the political decision to
squash corruption," he said.
Akbar's trial was controversial from the onset. His powerful
position as House speaker as well as chairman of the Golkar
Party, the country's second largest political party, raised
questions about whether the government was up to the task of
convicting him.
Analysts have said a successful conviction might lead the way
to more corruption cases implicating Golkar members, many of whom
are still influential.
The party had been the political machinery for Soeharto's 32-
year authoritarian rule. And many believe Golkar's weakness lies
with its past and especially in having people like Akbar around.
For President Megawati Soekarnoputri, the verdict could lend
her anticorruption campaign a boost. However extracting more from
Akbar's troubles risked provoking a Golkar backlash.
Last July Megawati blocked legislators' attempts to launch a
political investigation into Akbar, while at the same time
expressing confidence in the state's ongoing investigation.
But legal experts said that state prosecutors had watered down
Akbar's case by refusing to investigate the beneficiaries of the
money.
This move, Teten said, shut off the possibility of tracing the
money to Golkar whom many suspected received the funds ahead of
the 1999 general election.