Rooting out corruption
Rooting out corruption
The first of many, or just one of the few. That is the question
on many lips after the conviction of Abdullah Puteh on corruption
charges.
The 10-year sentence imposed on the suspended Aceh governor --
found guilty for the illegal mark-up of a helicopter purchase --
is a tribute to this nation's anticorruption drive and a shot in
the arm for a government eager to back up its campaign promise of
zero tolerance for corruption with concrete action.
But we have been in this situation before -- high profile
case, big headlines, severe punishment, reprieve and back to
business as usual.
Puteh's conviction, irrespective of whether the verdict is
overturned on appeal, represents a positive first step for the
Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK). It serves as a test case
of the KPK's ability to investigate and build a case for
prosecutors to take to the Anticorruption Court against a senior
and powerful local official.
It attaches credence to both novel institutions -- the KPK and
the Anticorruption Court -- as jointly forming the vanguard
against the pillaging of state resources.
The KPK is investigating other cases that will likely be taken
to court in the near future. The outcomes of these cases will
either solidify or negate the perception of the KPK as being able
to bring those who engage in corruption to account.
High profile cases such as Puteh's and the others being
investigated by the KPK by themselves will do little to prevent
malfeasance in the future. However, they constitute an essential
factor in the success of any system that is put in place to deter
corruption.
The investigation and conviction of senior officials will do
wonders in shaping moral standards. In a hierarchical society,
such as Indonesia's, where the voice of the public is only now
beginning to be taken into account, norms and values are defined
by those at the apex of the societal structure. If the public
perceives their leaders as being able to get away with "murder",
than the only logical conclusion is that such behavior is
acceptable.
The conviction of people like Puteh also empowers the general
public. It ends the cycle of impunity often attached to
individuals of rank and wealth.
Furthermore, this latest case helps prove that Indonesia now
truly has an independent mechanism -- free from political
influence and executive intervention -- to deal with corruption.
The KPK and Anticorruption Court will become, we hope, the new
"untouchables", relentlessly pursuing those who would sacrifice
the public weal to their personal greed.
With such a good start, it is now important for the public to
get involved. To assist in the disclosure of information and the
maintenance of the KPK's moral parameters so as to ensure that
its members do not succumb to the same temptations as those whom
it is investigating.
It is important to also note that one solitary case will not
be sufficient. Honesty is a state of mind, not a single, defining
action. More Putehs need to sit in the dock, and several guilty
verdicts will have to be handed down before this nation can even
begin to claim that it is on the way to eradicating corruption.
"Anticorruption" is as overused a word as reform. Everyone of
our last four presidents -- Soeharto, B.J. Habibie, Abdurrahman
Wahid and Megawati Soekarnoputri -- waxed lyrically about
eradicating corruption and launched high profile anticorruption
campaigns. All of which were to no avail. Not one of these even
began to correct the international perception of Indonesia as
being one of the most corrupt countries in the world.
Worst of all, not a few of these four presidents left office
under a cloud of suspicion of having facilitated, if not directly
participated in, the misappropriation of state funds.
President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono has made corruption
eradication a key part of his election platform. He has
repeatedly declared, both at home and abroad, his stance of zero
tolerance for corruption and that no one will be immune to
prosecution.
Puteh's conviction represents too small a step to be taken as
proof positive that the President's promises are more than mere
rhetoric. We need more proof, visible action and tangible
policies before we can say that we are now finally weeding out
the corruptors and doing what's right for the nation.