The special committee for the inquiry into the KPK holds its first closed-door meeting at the legislative complex, Jakarta, Thursday (8/6). The meeting was chaired by special committee head Agun Gunanjar (middle) accompanied by his deputies Taufiqulhadi (right) and Risa Mariska (left)
JAKARTA, KOMPAS — The House of Representatives has repeatedly said the House’s Inquiry Committee is not aimed at weakening or disbanding the KPK. However, the change of stance of several House factions regarding the inquiry and their views toward the KPK make the statement doubtful.
Such worry is growing as several inquiry committee members have said they will take forceful action if the KPK refuses to implement their recommendations. The recommendations include the change in standard operational procedure and revision of the Law No. 30/2002 on KPK.
“Revision [of KPK Law] is not something haram [forbidden],” said House Inquiry Committee member Muhammad Syafii of the Gerindra Party on Friday (9/6) in Jakarta.
Gerindra and National Mandate Party factions initially rejected the inquiry and did not assign their members to the inquiry committee. But, later they assigned their members. Aside from the two factions, the inquiry committee members also come from the PDI-P, Golkar, NasDem, United Development Party and Hanura.
The Democratic Party, National Awakening Party and Prosperous Justice Party have not assigned members.
Talks on the revision of the KPK Law arose repeatedly at the House. The latest, in February and March last year, the House Experts Body organized seminars to familiarize the revision idea.
However, the revision plan has always been rejected by anticorruption activists as they say it would weaken the KPK. According to some talks, the revision will strip the KPK of its authority to prosecute, the power to wiretap and give KPK the authority to issue a letter to stop an investigation.
Before the KPK, Indonesia had formed several anticorruption agencies. However, those agencies were unable to work optimally or were disbanded due to several reasons. It happened to, for example, the Joint Team for Corruption Eradication, which was formed in 2000. In 2001, the agency was disbanded following a judicial review at the Supreme Court.
No urgency
Gusdurian Network coordinator Alissa Wahid did not see the urgency for the formation of the inquiry committee nor its goodwill in corruption eradication. Therefore, it is only normal if there is suspicion that the House inquiry committee is a reaction to the KPK’s moves to investigate graft cases allegedly involving some House members.
“Considering many House members are being implicated in graft, the formation of the inquiry committee is odd. It is hard to be neutral and free from conflicts of interest,” she said.
The talks on the establishment of the inquiry committee arose after the KPK refused to open its investigation records into Miryam S Haryani, a Hanura Party politician, in relation to the e-ID graft case as demanded by House Commission III. Previously, during the trial, KPK investigators said Miryam had stated she was forced by some House Commission III members to withdraw her statement she made during KPK questioning. Later, Miryam, who was named a suspect for providing false information, stated she had not been pressed by House Commission III members.
Syarif Hidayatullah State Islamic University professor Azyumardi Azra said it was crystal clear the inquiry committee was a maneuver to weaken the KPK. “The inquiry looks to be a kind of revenge from House members against the KPK. Moreover, if we see the politicians in the special committee, it is dominated by those implicated in graft cases or have interests relating to the KPK,” Azyumardi said.
Komaruddin Hidayat, who is also a professor at Syarif Hidayatullah State Islamic University, reminded that the House gave birth to KPK because corruption had weakened Indonesia. The KPK was established because the existing antigraft agencies were not effective.
Advocate Todung Mulya Lubis demanded President Joko Widodo take stern action in responding to the inquiry committee. “The President’s stern action is needed because of the widespread corruption in Indonesia. The President needs to show he is on the side of the KPK,” he said.
However, Cabinet Secretary Pramono Anung Wibowo stated the government would not intervene because inquiry rights were the authority of the House. “That [inquiry] is the right of the House. The government will not intervene,” he said.
Recommendation
Inquiry committee deputy chairman Dossy Iskandar of the Hanura Party faction said there were possible recommendations from the House for the KPK.
Fellow inquiry committee deputy chairperson Risa Mariska of PDI-P faction said there was a forceful mechanism that could be carried if the KPK did not implement the recommendations from the inquiry committee.
“The forceful action can be made through the courts or the police,” she said.
The forceful action refers to Article 74 of Law No 17/2014 on MPR, DPR, DPD and DPRD, which stipulates the House has the right to give recommendations to state official, government officers, legal entity, citizens or people through meetings, including special meeting, for the sake of national and state interests.
The next verse states if the legal entity or citizens ignore or do not implement the recommendations of the House, the House can request the authorized agency to hand down the sanctions. If the entities that ignore the House recommendations are state officials or government officers, the House can request the President issue administrative sanctions to them.
But, Krisnadwipayana University criminal law professor Indriyanto Seno Adji argued the recommendations from the inquiry committee were not binding. As happened with the inquiry committee into Pelindo II, the recommendations of which were not implemented by the government.
The inquiry committee into Pelindo II at the end of 2015, for example, recommended President Joko Widodo to exercise his prerogative rights to dismiss State-Owned Enterprises Minister Rini Soemarno for violating regulations. The inquiry committee also recommended Rini to fire Pelindo II president director RJ Lino.
“The inquiry committee only issues recommendations and has neither legal impacts nor power against the KPK as an independent institution. The inquiry committee cannot disband the KPK,” Indriyanto said.
Meanwhile, KPK chairman Agus Rahardjo said he was still awaiting input from constitutional law experts. The KPK aims to make a decision on the inquiry committee this week.
