KKN still a common practice

As reported by The Jakarta Post on Dec. 29, 2001 , the appointment of Taufik Kiemas as a special envoy for a ministerial visit to China is a classic conflict of interest given his role as the president's husband, a legislator and a businessman. Using stronger words, we might say that by appointing her husband as a special envoy, the president has committed the New Order practice of corruption, collusion and nepotism (KKN). Of course, as president she has the prerogative to appoint the envoy of her choice, but when it comes to appointing members of her family, it would be wiser for the president to not only stick to the written laws and regulations but also to consider the issues of fairness and properness based on the feelings she has in her own heart.

Even though what she did was not against existing laws, I nonetheless believe the international community will laugh at us about it. It proves that the eradication of KKN in this country is only a slogan to gain popular support rather than a genuine effort to bring prosperity to the people.

I am very supportive of the idea proposed by the Coordinator of Corruption Watch (ICW), Teten Masduki, that the president should explain to the public why she appointed her husband to conduct state business. One of the reasons is that the trip was funded from the public purse and, as taxpayers, people deserve an explanation. In addition, she has to explain the results of the mission to assess whether the appointment of her husband has been beneficial or not for the country.

Back in 1999, former president Habibie presented a State medal to Mrs. Ainun Habibie in recognition of her active role in and support for social welfare activities. I am sure that Mrs. Ainun Habibie deserved to get the medal, considering her contribution was real. And of course former president Habibie was not breaking the law, but it was a little bit strange that her husband presented the medal to her while he was president. To me it reduced the value of her medal. It would have been nicer and more valuable if the medal had been presented by another president.

I am sure that the case of Mrs. Ainun Habibie is not comparable with the case of Mr.Taufik Kiemas, but both cases strike me as very strange and sometimes make me wonder what kind of "leaders" we have.

M SULHAN ASKANDAR

Jakarta