Silent tug-of-war

There is a barely concealed tug-of-war happening between the police and the Attorney General's Office today, which has been marked by stern public statements from both sides and provoked strong reactions from many other circles.

The dispute has shocked the public since they expect the two law enforcement agencies to boost their former good cooperation in the national law enforcement system.

But what is the bone of contention?

The altercation moved into the public spotlight after police arrested five employees of the Attorney General's Office early last month for allegedly falsifying statements, and encouraging witnesses to commit perjury in order to frame a person for a murder.

What stunned the public and upset the attorney general was not so much the fact that the police had the right to detain the five, who include three public prosecutors, but the way they did it.

According to a spokesperson for the Attorney General's Office the police needed its permission prior to making the arrests.

This practice can easily be understood as a professional ethic given that in similar cases in the past the police would approach the Prosecutor's Office first, in the interests of good cooperation.

So why did the police suddenly change their tune in this unfriendly way?

As no reason has been given many people speculate that it was because the police are still enraged by a Prosecutor's Office demand that a court in Bantul, Yogyakarta, acquit a man who was being tried there for the murder of a local journalist.

The prosecution concluded there were not enough witnesses or evidence to support a case against the defendant Dwi Sumaji, alias Iwik.

Although the court later dropped all charges against Iwik the issue seems to have struck a police dignity nerve, as they had gone all-out in their attempts to jail the defendant.

But during the trial the court heard that the police had used some questionable practices in their investigation of the suspect. Ensuing from this news was the interrogation by military police of the police officer who had used unthinkable schemes to trap Iwik.

The truth is still in the air, but since then the police have softened in their attitude and released the Attorney General's Office employees pending trial.

In this ugly game the Attorney General's Office is understood to be in a poor position. It too has the right to arrest any criminal suspect, but it has no right to touch police officers because they are also members of the Armed Forces.

The conflict looked to be going from bad to worse last week when police started questioning three freshly dismissed directors of Bank Indonesia, the central bank, for alleged corruption -- this type of case had traditionally come under the prosecutors' jurisdiction.

The attorney general was so very sure that the police had invaded his domain that he made a public statement late last week to say that based on an agreement between law enforcement agencies his office held the sole right to investigate graft cases.

The police retorted that they had a legal right to do the same.

As of yesterday the conflict was still dragging on. And the intensity of the dispute can only make the public believe that the two agencies do not represent dignity and professionalism, but some other mysterious function.

The government, in this case the minister of justice, should intervene in the dispute, and we believe that there are adequate legal means to solve it.

It also needs to answer a statement made by a legal expert who said that the handling of corruption cases by the Attorney General's Office, so far, has a weak legal basis because the right is only temporary -- until the police fully implement the new Criminal Law Procedures.

Anyway, the battle should be put to an end soon because the first casualty in this fight is law enforcement itself.

The law enforcement agencies will not come out winners of this war because they are slowly losing what they need: public trust.