Eradication of corruption requires clean legal system

Eradication of corruption requires clean legal system

Frans H. Winarta, Member, National Law Commission (KHN),
Jakarta

There has already been much said about corruption and how to
overcome it by various observers, law enforcers, NGO leaders,
government officials, educators and religious leaders of
different faiths. The cry of reformasi reverberated in 1998 with
the fall of the New Order regime, but since that time there are
still no signs that the incidence of corrupt practices is
diminishing -- let alone that it can be eradicated.

As illustrated by a recent publication of Yayasan Aksara in
collaboration with the Partnership for Governance Reform, this
country has long been plagued by severe corruption that has
touched almost all aspects of national life. No less than 16
studies on corruption in Indonesia were written by writers from a
variety of disciplines in respect of graft in the bureaucracy,
the courts, the banking sector, state-owned enterprises, foreign
aid, the private sector and financial institutions.

Corruption appears to have continued in more sophisticated
forms and become even more widespread. It is often conducted even
more openly with no sense of shame as if all the writings, all
the protests and demonstrations of the reform era have come to
nothing and the voice of the people has been ignored. The roots
of corruption seem to have dug so deep, become so entrenched and
so widespread as to make inroads nearly impossible. Yet, despite
this, there are countries that have managed to reduce corruption
to minimal levels.

The World Economic Form (WEF) reports that Indonesia is ranked
60 out of 120 countries in terms of competitiveness. This lack of
competitiveness is influenced by corruption, inefficiencies in
the bureaucracy and political instability. Malaysia is ranked
26th, Singapore 8th, Thailand 32nd and Vietnam 50th. Finland and
the United States were found to be the most competitive countries
according to the survey. Taiwan and Singapore were listed as the
fifth and sixth most prosperous countries respectively in Asia.

Of course, Indonesia is not the only country to suffer from
endemic corruption. The problem is of such worldwide significance
that the United Nations on October 30, 2003 accepted the Anti-
Corruption Agreement -- the first of its kind in the world -- to
be signed in Merdia, Mexico on Dec. 9-11, 2003. The draft
agreement has been two years in the making and will come into
effect within 90 days after being ratified by 30 countries.

In introducing UN acceptance of the agreement, Secretary-
General Kofi Annan declared in front of 191 member states of the
General Assembly: "The practice of corruption inflicts great pain
on the poor. Corruption may become the main cause of the
worsening of a country's economy and is a hindrance to
development and poverty reduction".

As part of a corruption eradication campaign, we need
prosecutors who are specially trained to deal with such crimes,
including money laundering, bank fraud, mark-ups, bribery,
extortion, conflict of interest, tampering with evidence,
falsification of signatures etc. Special expertise is needed to
deal with white collar crime. These kinds of investigations are
complex and require handling by a new breed of prosecutors who
are highly trained, honest, professional and capable of
maintaining their integrity. As the cutting edge of the anti-
corruption campaign, the prosecution of corruptors by special
prosecutors will give much-needed hope to the reform agenda.

The same is true of judges who will need special training to
deal with these kinds of cases. In fact, it would be better to
form a special court consisting of ad hoc judges to try
corruption matters. If big time corruptors can be convicted by
specially trained judges, this could have a snowball effect that
will win the support of the community that has long been hoping
for serious action against corruptors.

In order to respond to increasingly sophisticated crimes of
corruption and banking and finance violations, the Public
Prosecutor's office has to reform itself from the inside. The
Attorney-General's Office is currently preparing a reform program
in cooperation with the National Law Commission backed up by the
Partnership for Governance Reform in Indonesia.

The prosecutor's office needs to strengthen itself with a
professional audit team. In order to increase its professionalism
in tackling corruption-related crimes, special training is needed
in finance, banking, computers and money laundering. All this
will require considerable public expenditure. The appointment of
prosecutors specially trained to handle corruption is a good
start. The recent case of fraud at BNI, for instance, would
require a special team of prosecutors skilled in handling such
cases. The BNI case could actually be a landmark in the national
anti-corruption campaign if the prosecution is well handled and a
heavy sentence handed down.

One important issue is how to ensure that this institution at
the forefront of law enforcement is free from political
interference. The politicizing of the law has been going on for
too long. As part of the reform agenda, the institution of public
prosecutor must be made sterile from political influence and
interest. The community does not want to see the prosecutor or
the Attorney-General chasing various corruption suspects from
time to time based solely on who is in power at the time. There
were different corruption suspects in Habibie's time. They
changed under Abdurrahman Wahid's presidency and have changed
again now under Megawati.

One idea has been to place the Office of Public Prosecution
under the Supreme Court. Actually, this is not appropriate
because the institution needs to be in tune with the government's
anti-corruption drive. Placing the Prosecution under the auspices
of the Supreme Court would mean that the office may not properly
act in accordance with policies on fighting crime.

Heavy sentencing for the big fish by corruption courts would
give inspiration to other law enforcement bodies and to the
community at large who, in turn, will become more courageous in
reporting corruption cases. Just by handing down a few heavy
sentences to big-time corruptors, the courts will quickly send a
signal to the community that the government and the judicial
authorities are prepared to at last get tough on corruption.

Only in this way will there be hope in the struggle against
corruption that has for so long held a grip on this country.
Each breakthrough will lead the way toward a new culture that is
less tolerant of corruption. As early as possible at primary
schools, children should be taught about the principles of
honesty and the need to combat corruption.