Gelora Party proposes establishment of ethics court to prevent corruption
Jakarta (ANTARA) - The Gelombang Rakyat Party (Gelora) has proposed the establishment of an ethics court in Indonesia as an early-stage effort to prevent corruption.
Fahri Hamzah, Deputy Chairperson of the Gelora Party, stated in a briefing received in Jakarta on Saturday that while Indonesia possesses a legal judiciary, it lacks an integrated ethics court for all state officials.
“An ethics court would function to swiftly penalise officials involved in conflicts of interest or serious ethical violations through dismissal sanctions, without having to undergo the long and complex legal judicial process,” he said.
Fahlar noted that corruption remains an unresolved issue despite law enforcement agencies, such as the Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK), the National Police, and the Attorney General’s Office, having arrested numerous corruptors.
According to him, addressing corruption must not be approached from a single perspective. At least two approaches are required: a systemic approach from a legal standpoint and an individual approach from an ethical standpoint.
“When we discuss corruption as a crime, the instrument for analysis is the law, which concludes in the judicial system. However, it is not just about the system; there is the element of ‘every person’ involved, including individual leaders and bureaucrats. Therefore, in addition to the law for systemic enforcement, there must be an ethical element for the individual,” he said.
As a potential solution, he is pushing for the formation of an ethics court to prevent corruption from spreading.
“Its existence is vital as a shortcut to penalise ethical violations by public officials across the executive, legislative, and judicial branches before they evolve into criminal acts of corruption that damage state finances,” he added.
Currently, the handling of misconduct by public officials follows the criminal justice process, ranging from first-instance courts to appeals, cassation, and judicial reviews.
Fahri believes that an ethics court would make the process much faster.
“The decisions would be decisive, ranging from warnings to dismissal. As soon as an official’s conduct is deemed unethical, such as a conflict of interest, it can be reported to the ethics court, processed, and they can be dismissed so they can no longer hold office. This serves as prevention before it crosses the line into criminal corruption,” he stated.
Enforcing ethics at the individual level of officials is believed to serve as the first line of defence against graft, given that such practices have the potential to occur across all three branches of power.
He further emphasised that the success of anti-corruption efforts cannot be measured solely by the number of arrests made by law enforcement. True success in eradicating corruption is achieved when there are no longer any corruptors.
Fahri stressed that the fight against corruption must not be trapped in partial handling. Corruption, he argued, must be eradicated through a systemic approach and a comprehensive anatomical analysis.