Rise of the anticorruption movement

Rise of the anticorruption movement

The following is based on a presentation by lawyer
and chairman of the Ethical Board of the Jakarta-based Indonesian
Corruption Watch Todung Mulya Lubis at the Asia Regional Good
Governance Conference from Aug. 4 to Aug. 6 in Pnom Penh,
Cambodia.

PNOM PENH: Protests against corruption are not new. Since
Indonesia proclaimed its independence, protests against
corruption have been a theme drawing support from the vast
majority of the population. Almost every year, we have witnessed
a new group with a different name emerging to fight the battle
against corruption.

The idea of having a clean government has long been a dream of
many people. Students and social activists have always been at
the forefront of the various organizations or groups that have
been set up -- such as the Anticorruption Commission, the
Anticorruption Movement, the Austerity Movement, Indonesian
Corruption Watch and Indonesian Transparency Community.

Although most of these protest groups are based in Jakarta,
similar groups have also been established in the regions.

However most anticorruption groups have not lasted long and
have failed. They lacked the stamina to fight a long and hard
battle. Only recently, in the aftermath of Soeharto's regime have
anticorruption groups become more organized and focused. These
anticorruption groups in many cases have managed to mobilize
support from the community.

The most active anticorruption body is undoubtedly the
Indonesian Corruption Watch (ICW), set up by social activists,
retired judges, practicing lawyers and journalists.

The ICW launched an anticorruption campaign by publishing its
findings about corruption endemic in various governmental
departments or state-owned enterprises such Pertamina, Garuda
Indonesia Airlines, the State Logistics Agency (Bulog) and
others.

In cooperation with media activists, ICW consciously tried to
awaken people to the fact that corruption has stolen the people's
wealth. A series of television and radio talk shows were
organized, and interestingly, the anticorruption movement began
to receive strong support from society.

ICW started to receive reports about corruption from people,
though most sources were anonymous. Additionally, the reports
failed to enclose supporting evidence of corruption, and if any,
the supporting evidence happened to be photocopies.

Under Indonesian Law, photocopied documents are not admissible
in court. Therefore, those reports can only be used as
preliminary evidence subject to verification.

ICW realizes that it has limited means and ways to
successfully combat corruption. Thus, its main tactic is to
tirelessly campaign to embarrass both those who are corrupt and
their loyal protectors such as the police, the prosecutors, the
judges and others who control power.

Attacking the integrity of law enforcers is a key target of
anticorruption campaigns, and interestingly, it does work. For
instance, ICW succeeded in using public ridicule to force former
attorney general Andi Galib, a close aide to former president
B.J. Habibie, to resign from his post.

Widespread publication of Soeharto's abuses of power has also
finally forced the attorney general (Marzuki Darusman) to bring
Soeharto to court.

Similar tactics have also been employed by other
anticorruption groups. However, it is important to mention that
there have been more and more anticorruption groups established
which focus more on building databases, and doing research,
analysis and education.

An anticorruption network is about to emerge, linking certain
groups from various cities. Significantly, this networking has
managed to establish contact with various international
anticorruption non-governmental organizations like Transparency
International. Corrupt officials are now feeling much more
uncomfortable with the new environment critical of any form of
corruption.

An important prerequisite to succeeding in combating
corruption is the presence of a strong and independent judiciary
in addition to a committed police force, prosecutor and tax
apparatus. Of course, Indonesia lacks all of these key
components.

Judicial corruption in the country is the enemy number one.
Therefore, a fight to combat corruption must start from the
court. And the highest priority in that cleanup campaign must be
the removal of corrupt judges. It is for this very reason that
the government together with the legislature started to "reform"
the Supreme Court by filling out vacant seats with new judges who
have to pass a fit-and-proper test.

The chief justice must also be replaced by a reform-minded
judge who can lead the other judges in cleaning up the Supreme
Court and the lower courts.

A cleanup must also be conducted in the Attorney General's
Office, as well as the police. The time has come to prosecute and
punish corrupt judges, prosecutors and police officers in order
to set an example to others to obey the law. Once a judiciary and
other legal officers have been cleaned up, the fight to combat
corruption will be much easier.

Since combating corruption is high on the government's agenda,
the government has also set up some institutions that monitor and
investigate corruption.

The new institutions are, first, a new ombudsman in charge of
monitoring judicial corruption especially in the court; second, a
Joint Investigative Team within the Attorney General's office in
charge of assisting the attorney general in investigating
corruption cases in general; and, third, a Commission to
Investigate the Wealth of Public Officials, which is still in the
process of being established.

Reports say the government also plans to eventually set up an
Anticorruption Commission like the one in Hong Kong.

The 1971 law on anticorruption, amended in 1999, enables
judges to severely punish corrupt officials. In addition, a new
law concerning investigation of the wealth of public officials
has been adopted by the House of Representatives.

Certainly, this is far from sufficient because what is also
needed are laws that can protect witnesses and those who are
willing to come forward with corruption reports. For
anticorruption efforts to succeed, it is important to have a
witness protection act, a whistle blower act and a public
information act. Government sources claim that the government has
already prepared draft bills like these to protect witnesses.

The Attorney General's Office is, meanwhile, preparing a
"White Book on Corruption", describing state of the art of
corruption as well as the strategies to fight it.

The book will be used to gain public support for the
government's efforts in cleaning up the system. It is expected to
spell out the level of corruption in some sectors, such as the
judiciary, the civil service, forestry and state companies.

The description of corruption would give a better
understanding of corruption and possible links to poverty and our
crippled judiciary. Perhaps, we should be able to identify our
strengths and weaknesses in the legal institutions and human
resources. This identification will eventually lead us to a list
of action plans such as, perhaps, organizing training programs
for judges and prosecutors on asset tracing, forensic
investigations and the like.

What the government has done so far is quite unsatisfactory.
But it would be wrong to rely only on legal means. The government
needs a strong political will, translated into action at every
level of the administration in the capital as well as the
regions.

Translation of an anticorruption policy should in the first
place deal with the low level of salaries and welfare of civil
servants. Failure to improve the quality of life of the civil
servants and the people at large would hamper any anticorruption
campaign by the government.

There is also a need for strict and consistent law enforcement
in the sense that corrupt officials are brought to the courts and
punished accordingly. People would like to see concrete steps,
especially in bringing the "big fish" to court. As long as they
remain untouched, skepticism and distrust toward the sincerity of
the anticorruption campaign will naturally remain.

Finally, the government also needs to give teeth to
anticorruption watchdogs such as the ICW and Indonesian
Transparency Society. The media must also play a more active role
in exposing any allegations of corruption. For this, we need
skilled investigative journalism. It is for this reason that we
need to underline that this is the time to have new legislation.

The time to act is now. The government carries a heavy burden
mandated by the reformasi movement. The test in whether the
government does indeed support reform depends on success in the
battle against corruption, rather than in mere lip service.