rss

Tuesday, July 17, 2007

Reflection on Three-Year KPK

By: Firdaus Arifin
Writer: Lecturer Constitutional Law Section and Secretary of Constitutional Studies Center Faculty of Law, University of Pasundan, Bandung, West Java, Indonesian.

NOTHING feels three years after the age of the Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK). In the age which is still relatively young, the Commission has been able to be a promising institution, and invited many criticisms, a joyous thing. since the beginning of its presence Commission has invited a lot of public attention, many people hoped the Commission could be a solution to the logjam of corruption that occurred during this. Follow up was conducted by various gebrakanpun Commission as an effort in eradicating and combating corruption in Indonesia.

If we listened to the back, the birth of the Commission is the mandate of Law No.20 of 2001 on Corruption eradication as contained in Article 43 paragraph (1) states, the establishment of Commission for Corruption Eradication later than two years since this Act in legislated (November 21, 2001). In addition to the mandate of Law No.21/2001, which can argumetasi basis for the establishment of the Commission is to substitute the function of RI Attorney General and National Police (Police) are judged to be functional and does not show seriousness in the effort to eradicate corruption in Indonesia so far. And according to Article 6 of Law No. 30 of 2002 on Corruption Eradication Commission, the Commission has a duty and authority to coordinate with the relevant authorities to combat corruption, supervision of health authorities to eradicate corruption, to investigate, investigation, and prosecution of corruption cases, take action prevention measures corruption, and to monitor the implementation of the state government.

Please note, if viewed from the historical aspect of corruption in Indonesia, the Commission is not the first institution that was formed to eradicate corruption in Indonesia. History records from the period 1967-2002, at least eight agencies / teams eradication of corruption was formed as an effort to eradicate corruption.

Once in the New Order (New Order) the establishment of institutions / teams formed to eradicate corruption from the first time on 2 December 1967, through Presidential Decree. 228/1967 Corruption eradication team name. Institution / second team, formed through a Presidential Decree. 12/1970 dated 31 January 1970 a Commission of four teams. Institution / third team, formed in 1970 a team of Anti-Corruption Committee (KAK). Institution / fourth team, formed in 1977 through Presidential Instruction No.. 9 / 1977 name OPSTIB team. Institution / fifth team, in 1982 the Corruption Eradication Team (TPK) is turned on again. However, Presidential Decree regulating ironically more about the duties and authority of TPK was never realized.

Furthermore, during the reform push and pressure from the people and to launch an eradication of corruption, collusion and nepotism (KKN) is so great days of New Order government, the Government together with the House of Representatives (DPR) make improvements to Law No. 3 Year 1971 on Eradication of Corruption became Law No. 31 Year 1999 on Eradication of Corruption act. Next was established institutions / sixth team, through a Presidential Decree. 127 in 1999, a Commission inspection team Wealth of State Officials (KPKPN). Institution / seventh team, was established by Government Regulation (PP) No.19 In 2000 a joint team eradication of corruption (TGTPK). Finally, after the dissolution of established institutions TGTPK / eight teams, based on Law No.30/2002 with the name of the Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK).

Although currently most people who rate the performance of the Commission is still less than satisfactory, but when evaluated in a comprehensive performance from the eight agencies / team was formed to memberatas corruption, the Commission's performance as a result of the new institution "for the rest of the corn" can be said is quite good and satisfactory in make efforts to eradicate corruption when compared with seven similar institutions had formed earlier. This can be proved from the Commission's success in uncovering corruption cases committed by state officials. Many of those state officials who eventually became defendants sentenced to prison even lead to no light. Several corruption cases of government officials who successfully dismantled by the Commission among others, cases of corruption that made the helicopter purchase by the former Governor of Nanggroe Aceh Darussalam Abdullah Puteh, corruption cases that occurred in the General Elections Commission (KPU), which involves KPU Chairman Nazaruddin Sjamsudin and Mulyana W Kusumah. In fact, the Commission managed to uncover performance and prove that the mob justice have been roaming the world to dismantle our judicial bribery case involving a lawyer Probosutejo, Harini Wijoso, and employees of the Supreme Court Pono Waluyo.

Apparently, the results of the Commission's performance is quite successful in uncovering corruption sharing does not necessarily reap something positive, the response occurred it was a cause of resistance in the form of counterattack corruptors (corruptors fight back) to the Commission. As we know, at the end of last August, three men convicted of corruption cases, Mulyana Wirakusumah, Nazaruddin Sjamsudin et al, and Capt.. Tarcisius Walla, to test the constitutionality of a number of vital articles in Law No.30/2002 on the 1945 Constitution to the Constitutional Court (MK). But the backlash to the Commission corruptors not result in mengembirakan. Through the Tax Court decision to grant only part 012-016-019/PUU-IV/2006 petition filed by Nazaruddin Sjamsudin et al by stating that Article 53 of Law No. 30/2002 on the Commission contrary to Article 24 paragraph 1, 2, Article 24A Paragraph 5, and Article 28D Paragraph 1 of the 1945 Constitution. And the Court rejected as a whole petition filed by Mulyana Wirakusumah and Capt.. Tarcisius Walla. Practical thus if we are relying on the decision of the Court is currently a constitutional aspects of the Commission's existence no doubt.

Finally, in the future we hope the Commission as the front guard in the eradication of corruption, could play a more optimal in eradicating corruption in Indonesia. Because if not, corrupt the disease suffered by this nation, since the new order until this moment will never be cured.










0 komentar:

Google Translate

English French German Spain Italian Dutch

Russian Portuguese Japanese Korean Arabic Chinese Simplified

Law School

Advertisement

Book

Reflection Constitutional Reform 1998-2002


Guest Book


Free Page Rank Tool


 

Friends

Followers

Chicklet