Needed: An attorney General of high candor

The wealth report that Attorney General M.A. Rachman filed with the Public Servants Wealth Audit Commission (KPKPN) reportedly contained discrepancies, giving rise to allegations of corruption. According to the audit commission, Rachman should resign or be forced from his position because of his alleged dishonesty. Chairman of Ombudsman Commission Anton Suyata, who is also former deputy attorney general for special crimes, discussed the matter and related issues with The Jakarta Post's Soeryo Winoto.

Question: What do you think about the case involving Attorney General M.A. Rachman, from a legal point of view?

Answer: First, I would say there is an obligation for state officials to report their wealth and they must be willing to have their wealth investigated, based on Law No. 28/1999 and People's Consultative Assembly (MPR) Decree No. XXI/1998 on clean governance. Second, (you have to ask) have the state officials abided by the rules? (If not), then the sanctions. Any state executive found violating Law No. 28 and MPR Decree No. XXI are subject to administrative sanctions based on Government Regulation (on public servants) No. 30/1980. Those filing false reports on their wealth are subject to punishment based on the Criminal Code.

And from a moral point of view?

The above (legal) sanctions must be morally proper. Legal sanctions have a clear yardstick, but not so for morality.

Unfortunately in Indonesia many people fail to respect moral properness, taking it for granted. Other countries like Japan, Korea and India respect properness better than us in Indonesia.

Does Rachman's case reflect the true situation in the Attorney General's Office?

I don't think so. There are 15,000 people working in prosecutor's offices (including the Attorney General's Office) around the country. Some 6,500 of whom are prosecutors, and not all of them are dirty. It is absolutely correct that the top people at prosecutor's offices must always set a good examples for his or her subordinates. Pak Rachman's case is an individual affair. But it (the case) does affect the Attorney General's Office, which should represent the supremacy of the law.

Pak A.M. Ghalib, the former attorney general, was allegedly involved in graft, and many prosecutors are reportedly involved in what people call the mafia of justice. Can you say what is really going on with our prosecutors?

I just read a report yesterday that Indonesia is one of the 27 most corrupt countries in the world. That means that it is not only the prosecutors who are corrupt. Maybe prosecutor's offices just represent other institutions.

So, you would say that the true situation in Indonesia is worse than just this case?

Yes, it is. Rampant corruption in the country is committed by officials based on their grade or ranks. If a neighborhood chief steals 26, the official at the subdistrict head's office will take 62. There is always a multiplication in the amount of money swindled, based on the grade or level of the corrupt official.

And this happens everywhere at any time. Corruption is blatantly committed here. We find it difficult to distinguish between policy and criminal activity. The Bulog case, which involves (House Speaker Akbar Tandjung), is the clearest example of this. Those (officials) who steal small amounts of money are called criminals, but when it reaches the top officials the offenses are said to have been carried out in line with (state) policy.

If the Attorney General's Office, the courts and the police have lost their credibility, then where can people turn for justice? And how can the institutions, the Attorney General's Office in this case, mend their images?

There must be short-term and long-term plans.

The short-term action is to replace unscrupulous officials who have key positions with those who are more qualified and more credible. The new officials must be given certain targets and objectives. The long-term plan is to open (institutions) to public supervision.

This means giving people access to monitor what the (government) officials are doing and have done. We should have an integrated criminal justice system. But so far what we have is a disintegrated system. The law enforcement institutions work in their own ways for their own interests.

The system must be put on the right track. And there must be some supervision to enable the system to run smoothly, with clear objectives.

Therefore, an integrated control system is a must to give the public access to allow them to monitor the law enforcers.

How would such a system work?

Law enforcers at every level would be obliged to fill out progress reports on what they are doing, maybe through a website or some other medium that makes it easy for the people to access.

At the regency or mayoralty level, the reports could be filed once a month, at the provincial level the reports could be filed once every three months, and at the national level (the ministry level) the reports could be submitted twice a year.

Once again, the people must be given access to the reports. I introduced all of these ideas two years ago at a meeting of the National Law Commission organized by the University of Indonesia. I have also written a book on this and I hope that the Attorney General's Office will take it into consideration.

Do you believe that law enforcers, including the prosecutor's offices, will act on your proposals or advice?

The question is do they want to hear what I say? How can they respond to my advice if they don't hear it?

If Attorney General A.M. Rachman steps down, who do you think is the best candidate to succeed him? Many people have suggested a non-career prosecutor, someone from outside the prosecutor's office. What do you think?

In the history of the Republic, most of the attorney generals have not been career prosecutors, people like Ali Said, Ismail Saleh, Pak Singgih and Pak Andi Ghalib. There is no difference whether the new attorney general is a career or a non-career prosecutor. The most important thing is that he or she must have a great deal of credibility, and they must have a vision of the Attorney General's Office's main mission.