Dazing antigraft drive

Dazing antigraft drive

Many people have grown more and more impatient in watching the
authorities' slow steps toward clean governance. And people
always get hurt because of the way the government stubbornly
defends its failures. This is especially true in the
investigation into former president Soeharto's assets, which he
allegedly amassed through abuses of power during his three
decades of authoritarian rule.

In the provinces, people seem not to be so disturbed by
Soeharto's alleged misdeeds because they are busy with antigraft
campaigns. But their patience has been equally thinning.

The most recent case of public impatience took place in
Ujungpandang, South Sulawesi, early this week. Hundreds of
students and lecturers, who had closely watched the investigation
and court hearings of a corruption case involving a director of a
local cooperative, staged a demonstration against the provincial
prosecutor's office because of its demand for the acquittal of
the defendant. Nurdin Halid, who is a member of the House of
Representatives, is standing trial on charges of embezzling Rp
115.77 billion (US$12 million) from the cooperative.

The protesters' actions may seem premature because the judge
has not as yet handed down any verdict. But many people in the
provincial capital city seem to have drawn their own conclusion
of the case for no clear reason. Perhaps they are incensed by the
fact that the defendant is a member of the government faction,
Golkar, and that he has been a close associate of Hutomo "Tommy"
Mandala Putra, Soeharto's youngest son who once held a monopoly
on the clove trade.

All clove farmers were obliged to open accounts at the central
cooperative, which acted as the sole buyer from village
cooperatives in the provinces. Clove growers were also obliged to
sell their produce to village cooperatives. The protesters'
motivation is clear: they want to influence the court's ruling
because they have lost trust in the judicial body. It is a common
phenomenon in Indonesia today.

The case itself has caused confusion from the very beginning.
In October, deputy attorney general for supervision, Jacob Rahim
Saleh, said no evidence of criminal activity had been found in
the case, but several days later his statement was boisterously
denied by the chief of the provincial prosecutor's office, HM
Gagoek Subayanto.

Attorney General Andi M. Ghalib later ordered Gagoek to
seriously investigate the case. The suspect claimed Gagoek's
initiative was politically motivated. To pressure the prosecution
into a more serious probe, students started to hold rallies.

But their activities were too noisy for Gagoek's ears and he
requested an early retirement, to start five months later.
However, when his request was accepted by the attorney general,
Gagoek expressed great shock. At the same time and for no clear
reason, his spokesman was transferred to the faraway province of
Irian Jaya in what could be described as nothing but a demotion.
The two measures upset many law experts who saw them as efforts
to discourage antigraft campaigns.

Earlier, Nurdin, the suspect, said he had affidavits by two
cooperative officials saying they had bribed Gagoek on two
separate occasions. Gagoek, he claimed, had been badly in need of
money to finance the construction of his house in Jakarta and the
wedding reception of his daughter.

He claimed the bribes were for Rp 50 million and 25 million.
Nurdin made the statement while denying Gagoek's accusation that
he had tried to bribe the prosecutor with Rp 1 billion
(US$100,000) through two people in order to have the case
dropped. Observers then questioned why Gagoek did not try to
arrest those who arrived to deliver the Rp 1 billion.

Briefly speaking, the case is a dark picture of the country's
fight against corruption. While Nurdin awaits his verdict and
confrontation between the authorities and protesters continue,
the final casualty will surely be the country's judicial
institution, the image of which has been drastically tarnished.