Regional heads and former regional heads constitute the majority of public leaders involved in corruption. KPK data show that the commission handled cases that involved 143 governors, mayors, regents or their deputies.
By
KOMPAS EDITOR
·3 minutes read
“A regent or any other leader, of course, should be honest.” So said Saryono, 53, an ordinary member of the public who works as a becak (pedicab) driver at the town square in Banjarnegara.
Saryono’s expectation was revealed in a report in this daily on Monday (6/9/2021), after the Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK) declared Budhi Sarwono, the Regent of Banjarnegara in Central Java, and his confidant Kedy Afandi, as suspects in a corruption case involving the procurement of goods and services in 2017-2018. Budhi allegedly received a “commission” totaling Rp 2.1 billion from infrastructure projects. Budhi has denied any involvement in corruption.
Apart from the Banjarnegara regent, the public has also learned over the past week the news of the arrest of the Probolinggo Regent in East Java, Puput Tantriana Sari, along with her husband Hasan Aminuddin, a former Probolinggo regent who is now a member of the House of Representatives (DPR). The couple was allegedly involved in corruption involving the abuse of power and trading official positions. The KPK also named 17 civil servants as suspects (Kompas, 31/8-4/9 2021).
Budhi, Puput and Hasan are either incumbent regional heads or former regional heads who have been implicated in corruption. This year alone, no less than nine regional heads or ex-regional heads have been detained by the KPK. Among them are inactive South Sulawesi governor Nurdin Abdullah, Mamberamo Raya (Papua) Regent Dorinus Dasinapa, inactive West Bandung (West Java) regent Aa Umbara Sutisna and inactive Bintan (Riau Islands) regent Apri Sujadi.
Regional heads and former regional heads constitute the majority of public leaders involved in corruption. KPK data for 2004-2020 show that the commission handled cases that involved 143 governors, mayors, regents or their deputies. This figure is lower compared to the 274 members of the DPR and regional councils or 230 officials of echelons I, II, and III who were implicated in corruption cases during the same period. According to on the commission, officials of provincial, municipal or regency administrations comprised the majority of those implicated in corruption, or 561 out of the 1,123 cases the KPK handled in 2004-2020.
In terms of the types of cases, 739 of the 1,122 cases the KPK processed in 2004-2020 involved bribery and comprised the majority, while 236 cases involved corruption in the procurement of goods and services. These two types of corruption cases have primarily involved regional heads. The alleged trading of official positions implicating the Probolinggo regent and the alleged commission given to the Banjarnegara regent from regional projects, which is categorized as bribery, are also types of cases that have previously disgraced regional heads or ex-regional heads. They were imprisoned and humiliated before the local public.
Nonetheless, other regional heads have not learned these bitter lessons of their predecessors as a deterrent against committing corruption. At the very least, they should have thought twice before committing any crime. High political cost is usually the excuse used by corrupt regional heads. If they are already aware of the high cost of political campaigns and cannot afford to run independently, why did they announce their candidacy?
Corruption occurs as a result of opportunity and individual dishonesty. Independence co-proclaimer Mohammad Hatta once said, “Lack of intellect can be improved through study, lack of skill can be overcome through experience. However, dishonesty is difficult to correct.” If that is the case, then it is indeed hard to be deterred from corruption.