Verdict on Akbar betrays justice: Experts
Muhammad Nafik, The Jakarta Post, Jakarta
Akbar Tandjung's three-year jail sentence for corruption is too lenient and falls short of serving justice, prominent lawyers and an anti-corruption campaigner say.
Tandjung, the speaker of the House of Representatives and leader of the powerful Golkar party, should also have been jailed immediately, the experts say.
The verdict showed that law enforcers -- in this case the court and the Attorney General's Office -- were not serious in eradicating corruption in one of the world's most corrupt nations, Legal Aid and Human Rights Association (PBHI) director Hendardi said.
"From the beginning, I have had no faith in the government to fight against corruption," Hendardi said.
"The judges should have given Akbar Tandjung a heavy sentence and ordered his immediate detention," Indonesian Corruption Watch (ICW) coordinator Teten Masduki told The Jakarta Post.
Teten said the lenient sentence was "part of a political compromise" between President Megawati Soekarnoputri's Indonesian Democratic Party of Struggle (PDI Perjuangan) and Akbar's Golkar Party.
"It only serves the interests of the two largest parties, which have become a political oligarchy, and ignores the public's sense of justice," added the staunch anti-corruption advocate.
The Central Jakarta District Court declared Akbar guilty of corruption on Wednesday, sentencing him to three years in prison for misappropriating Rp 40 billion (US$4.5 million) funds from the State Logistics Agency (Bulog) in 1999. The money was earmarked to feed the poor.
Akbar has appealed the verdict.
Hendardi said the verdict spurned genuine law enforcement against high-profile criminals.
"The question is not only how long Akbar is sentenced, but also why he was not sent to prison immediately. Waiting for the appeals court's decision will be too long or even impossible to see him jailed as the case is politically tainted," Hendardi said.
Prominent lawyer Todung Mulya Lubis said the verdict would not automatically boost public confidence in the judiciary, which have long been contaminated by corruption.
He, however, praised efforts by the judges to stay independent. "Let's see what happens in the future," he added.
Hendardi and Teten said Akbar should have been sentenced to at least 20 years in prison, the maximum penalty for corruption.
Teten blasted the judges and prosecutors for failing to solve the financial scam, which involved Golkar as an institution when its former senior leader B.J. Habibie was president.
Many allege that the Rp 40 billion in funds, which was returned to prosecutors before the trial began, was used to help finance Golkar's 1999 electoral campaign.
"This should have been traced through the trial," Teten said.
He said that it was impossible the money was used to feed the poor, arguing the Habibie administration and the International Monetary Fund had allotted Rp 17.70 trillion in November 1998 for public food assistance.