Anticorruption vanguards
The five leaders of the Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK) were finally elected on Tuesday by the House of Representatives from ten candidates put forward by the government selection committee. But critics are already expressing doubt over the team's integrity and whether it can live up to the public's expectations.
The biggest disappointment seems to be the failure of such highly respected figures as Marsillam Simandjuntak, Bambang Widjojanto and Mohammad Yamin to join the KPK.
However, given the tight time frame -- that had not allowed meaningful public consultation on the selection process -- and the vested interests of the various House factions, the five chosen candidates seem to be the best we can get for now. At least we will soon have a politically independent commission, which was set up through a widely transparent process.
We should give them the benefit of the doubt.
The five KPK members, whose names will soon be submitted to the President for ratification, still represent a good mix of technical competence needed for the investigation and prosecution of corrupters. Taufiequrahman Ruki, a former police officer, will lead the KPK. The other four members, consisting of three auditors and one former public prosecutor, will act as deputy chairmen.
Certainly, the KPK is expected to be much more effective than previous anticorruption agencies because it is mandated by a special law, (Law No: 30/2002), which provides it with political independence and strong powers to investigate and prosecute corruption cases.
Judging from the experiences of successful anticorruption agencies, such as those in Malaysia, Hong Kong, Singapore, South Korea and New South Wales (Australia), Law No.30/2002 is clear- cut, strong, and comprehensive enough, as a legal foundation, to give more teeth to the KPK.
The law, for example, stipulates that the KPK shall be equipped with four departments in charge of prevention, repression, information and data gathering (research), and internal control and public complaints, respectively.
The prevention department will take over the function of the current Public Servant's Wealth Audit Commission (KPKPN), which has not been effective as it is devoid of the power to investigate and prosecute.
Public officials will herein be quite careful and thorough in reporting their assets to the KPK, knowing that they are subject to investigation and prosecution by KPK officials. This compulsory declaration of assets, combined with the powerful financial intelligence unit which was established under the anti money-laundering law, will make it more difficult for officials to hide and launder their ill-gotten wealth.
Most important, is that Law No.30/2002 supports the KPK with the establishment of special anticorruption courts within district courts, with career and ad hoc judges, who will undergo special training before they are selected and appointed directly by the chief justice of the Supreme Court.
Moreover, the KPK will operate under a more conducive, social and public opinion climate for fighting corruption, especially after the Indonesian Chamber of Commerce and Industry (Kadin), religious organizations, non-governmental corruption watchdogs and professional associations have set up coalitions for a nationwide, anticorruption drive.
Certainly the public credibility of KPK will depend on its ability to deliver early results with the successful prosecution of several high-profile graft cases. Hence, the KPK needs to be strategic and selective about its work agenda, so that its resources will not be spread too thin across insignificant cases.
The KPK, for example, could deliver a strong message early on by taking over several high-profile corruption cases -- which had either been shelved or are being handled in a questionable manner by the police or Attorney General's Office.
This will, however, be possible only if the government acts quickly to provide the KPK with adequate financial and staff resources to carry out its monitoring, investigative and prosecutorial responsibilities. Adequate funding will especially be crucial, to ensure the integrity and technical competence of those recruited to the KPK.
The macroeconomic stability, as the World Bank observed in a recent report, has been clouded by widespread concerns over corruption across Indonesia. Corruption, nepotism and collusion between officials and businesspeople was established as one of the primary causes of the 1997 economic crisis, yet very few have been held to account for the massive plundering of the nation's wealth.
We put great expectations on the KPK, to reduce corruption by making the cost of graft very dear and the chance of being caught in malfeasance very big.