Progressive and Breakthrough Step

KOMPAS/WISNU WIDIANTORO

Chief Justice Muhammad Syarifuddin gave his remarks after being elected as Chief Justice of the 2020-2025 Period in the Special Plenary Session on Election of Chief Justice at the Supreme Court Building, Jakarta, Monday (6/4/2020).

The Supreme Court\'s step to issue guidelines for judges to sentence corruption defendants is a breakthrough and it responds to public concern.

The guidelines are contained in Supreme Court Regulation (Perma) No. 1/2020 concerning guidelines for judges in implementing Article 2 and Article 3 of the Corruption Law. The Supreme Court regulation was signed by Supreme Court chief justice M. Syarifuddin on 24 July 2020. The action of the chief justice should be appreciated to respond to the nation\'s exhaustion in fighting corruption.

Also read : Corruption in the Midst of Coronavirus

The regulation specifies degrees of corruption, with the most severe category being corruption cases that bring state losses that harm state finances and the economy of more than Rp 100 billion. Cases falling into the severe category are those that cause state losses of Rp 25 billion to Rp 100 billion, the moderate category includes cases that cause Rp 1 billion to Rp 25 billion in losses, and the lightest category includes cases that cause state losses of less than Rp 200 million. In issuing a ruling, the judge is expected to consider the degree of error, the impact it has on the country and the benefits enjoyed by the defendants. If all are categorized as severe, the judge can sentence the defendant to 16 to 20 years in prison or life imprisonment.

The Supreme Court\'s verdict guideline is an answer to public concern about corruption. Political elites, including national leaders, look tired of fighting corruption. The Corruption Eradication Commission has been amputated and made a branch of the executive power. The KPK lost its strength in eradicating corruption. When graft suspect Wahyu Setiawan offered himself as a whistleblower, he was rejected by the KPK prosecutors. No wonder public confidence in the KPK has gone down. The National Police and the prosecutor\'s office were too overwhelmed with the Djoko Tjandra case.

Also read : Playing with Law

KOMPAS/HERU SRI KUMORO

General Elections Commission (KPU) commissioner Wahyu Setiawan, wearing a detention vest, sits in a car ready to transport him to detention on 23 Jan. 2020 at the Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK). Wahyu was questioned as a suspect in a bribery case surrounding the replacement of a lawmaker from the Indonesian Democratic Party of Struggle (PDI-P).

The Supreme Court regulation can be a hope for the public to be more eager to eradicate corruption. Corruption cannot be separated from the state apparatus\' understanding of power. Among some state officials, power is treated like private property. As a result, power is traded, including issuing a travel permit for fugitives. A law enforcer without considering ethics and appropriateness can meet fugitives abroad. It’s so saddening.

Also read : Corruption Law Enforcement Dilemma

Given such a situation, the Supreme Court regulation gives hope. Progressiveness in corruption eradication must instead continue to be voiced when the KPK seems to have lost its power to eradicate corruption. If it is to be made more progressive, the Supreme Court can add guidelines for stricter rulings and encourage judges to issue additional sentences. The additional sentences can be handed down to corrupt politicians by revoking their political rights, seizing their wealth obtained from corruption, including other social penalties. Corruption in Indonesia, which is acute and rooted, is impossible to fight only through calling and suggestion.

It needs a deterrent effect and followed by improvements in bureaucracy and system. When the elite are tired of fighting corruption, the Supreme Court should not be tired of fighting corruption. The Supreme Court must be committed to the regulations it produced. It will be tested by a number of cassation claims or reviews of corruption cases that are being handled by the Supreme Court. If the Supreme Court judge denies these appeals, the dignity of the court would be finished.