Audit body 'lacks teeth to fight corruptions'

Audit body 'lacks teeth to fight corruptions'

Muninggar Sri Saraswati, The Jakarta Post, Jakarta

Governor Sutiyoso claimed in his 2001 budget speech last week
that his administration was serious in eradicating corruption
from the city government.

He said that the City Inspectorate, now called the City Audit
Agency (Bawasda), had enhanced its efforts to combat corruption,
collusion and nepotism in the administration.

All of the efforts necessary were being made in order to
implement clean government, he said.

The audit agency found 87 cases of suspected corruption last
year, but only 59 cases were proved. In 2000, the body found 82
cases of suspected corruption, of which 24 cases were proved.

Sutiyoso did not mention whether the officials implicated in
corruption were brought before the courts, or even questioned by
the police or prosecutor's office.

Administration officials have cause to fear the audit agency
as it has the authority to recommend their dismissal for
violations of the administration's regulations or other
irregularities, including corruption.

The agency also has the power to forward the cases to the
police or prosecutor's office.

However, only a very few officials implicated in corruption
have been brought before the courts. If prosecutions were taken,
this was normally only after extensive reporting in the media.

Critics said that the city administration's audit agency
failed to support the clean government policy as it was part of
the administration. This prevented it from being fair and
independent.

"The audit agency cannot function properly as it serves the
administration. They tend to cover up their colleagues' mistakes
rather than exposing them to the public," said lawyer Tubagus
Haryo Karbyanto of the Jakarta Legal Aid Institute.

The agency, according to Tubagus, could only deal with
irregularities involving civil servants, especially low ranking
officials who violated the disciplinary code.

Audit agency officials contacted by The Jakarta Post refused
to comment.

However, city spokesman Muhayat brushed aside the accusations
that the audit agency had failed to function properly in
eradicating corruption.

"The agency can't send a case (to the prosecutor's office)
without proper evidence," he said.

He specifically pointed to the case of a former director of
city-run Bank DKI, Maman Sulasman, who was brought by the agency
to the prosecutor's office in 2000.

Maman was later tried in the Central Jakarta District Court
for allegedly being involved in the manipulation of bank funds
worth over Rp 800 billion (US$80 million). But he was acquitted
of the graft charges.

"Don't ask us why he was freed. It's outside of our control,"
Muhayat said.

However, he admitted that the cases examined by the audit body
were mostly violations of the administration's regulations.

Asked whether the administration would separate the agency
from the administration's organizational structure so as to
improve its performance in fighting corruption, Muhayat said, "We
haven't discussed this."

Maman was the only city official who was tried on corruption
charges in 2000.

In his 2000 speech, Sutiyoso said that the City Inspectorate
had sent two officials to the court and 21 others to the police
and prosecutor's office.

Corruption can, of course, also occur in the City
Inspectorate.

In 1998, the city inspector himself, Sutardjianto, was tried
by the West Jakarta District Court for corruption. He was
sentenced to eight months of probation for receiving a Rp 1.699
billion bribe.