Skip to main content

The Pebble of Bank Century

(published by The Jakarta Post on 03 Dec 2009. Click here)

Vice President Boediono and Finance Minister Sri Mulyani Indrawati are now standing in the brink over the case of Bank Century bailout. Just like the boxer who is cornered in the boxing ring, their position has made their “pro-enemy” supporters cheer and dance in brouhaha. The supporters avidly want them both knocked-out as early as possible.

It is difficult not to say that Boediono and Sri Mulyani obviously are a minimum target by their “enemies”. I said as the “minimum” because if they are out (whether they are pressured to resign from the Cabinet or suspended temporarily), the other target is President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono. Say Yudhoyono is strong enough to stand in the middle of the storm, tarnishing his reputation is sufficient for his political foes, at least at this time.

The Bank Century debacle, indeed, should be investigated to reveal what has been going on. The scandal should be opened to answer the allegation that there was misappropriation of the bailout process and fraud within the Bank Century, that the Rp. 6.7 trillion of the bailout was saving deposits of several high figure depositors rather than save the entire domestic banking industry and Indonesian economy, that some of the money had flown to the Democratic Party and to fund Yudhoyono’s campaign for legislative and presidential election.

That’s the allegation that has spread among public, where Boediono and Sri Mulyani are mentioned as the most responsible. As usual, pressure is mounting from some elements demanded Boediono and Sri Mulyani be fired, although the allegations have yet to be proved. Additionally, process to follow-up the audit result of the Supreme Audit Agency (BPK) is still ongoing. Where is the logic on pressing them to resign?

The House of Representative, pioneered by the Indonesian Democratic Party of Struggle (PDI-P) party formed an inquiry committee to investigate the case. The inquiry committee will have power to summon anyone who is implicated in the scandal including Boediono, Sri Mulyani, and even the President for questioning.

We are keen for this country to handle economic challenges properly and prudently by our leaders to ensure good governance. However, is the spirit of good governance solely what motivated the inquiry committee to form? I wish so, but please forgive me if I personally doubt it, moreover after learned the case was, since the beginning, driven to aim the two most trusted aides of President SBY as the shooting targets.

My doubt over the motivation of the inquiry committee is mostly supported by the fact that Sri Mulyani has created a lot of enemies during her term as the finance minister. Her personality as the decisive, uncompromised, clean, and not afraid to bulldoze the corrupt officials within her institution, has gained praise from many and at the same time also has been cursed, such as her bulldozing characteristic.

Her stance as the guard of state budget also irritated whoever requested to get bailouts for their companies that suffered losses during the global financial crisis recently. Her victory at one sides, is a loss for others at other sides. That is a Pyrrhic victory and now the losers are waiting for her fall.

It is important to know Yudhoyono supported actions to open the scandal. He, through his Democratic Party eventually backed the plan of the House of Representative to form inquiry committee to investigate it.

President Yudhoyono should make everything clear, not only because his name, his family and his party have been accused of receiving the bailout funds, but also to defend the government's reputation.

The great man has not stumbled over a mountain but a pebble. Will the Bank Century fiasco become a pebble for Boediono, Sri Mulyani or even SBY?

***
Serpong, 30 Nov 2009
Titus J.

related stories:
A Laugh at Our Lawmakers
The Iron Lady is Winning the Battle

Comments

Blog Watcher said…
http://asyiknyaduniakita.blogspot.com/
Blog Watcher said…
MENCIUM SKENARIO POLITIK DIBALIK PENGUCURAN DANA BAILOUT 6,7 TRILIUN KE BANK CENTURY


Lembaga Penjamin Simpanan (LPS) telah mengucurkan dana sebesar Rp6,7 triliun kepada Bank Century atas rekomendasi pemerintah dan Bank Indonesia. Angka itu menjadi bengkak, padahal semula yang di setujui DPR hanya sebesar Rp1,3 triliun. (Kompas 1 september 2009).

“ Betapa baiknya sikap pemerintah terhadap pemilik bank yang selama ini bermasalah”. “Kenapa pemerintah selalu bersikap protektif terhadap bank-bank yang pengelolaannya bermasalah??” semua itu Patut menjadi misteri bagi kita.

*********************

UU Nomor 10 Tahun 1998 tentang perbankan, mewajibkan semua bank berhati-hati dalam memberikan pinjaman. Namun LPS mengabaikan aturan tersebut.

Prinsip the five C’s of credit analysis yang menjadi dasar pemberian dana talangan rupanya tidak diterapkan oleh LPS. LPS harusnya meneliti Character (kejujuran pemilik bank), collateral (jaminan utang bank), capital (modal), capacity (kemampuan mengelola bank) dan condition of economy sebelum boilout diberikan.

Dalam proses hukum bank Century, pemilik bank century Robert tantular beserta pejabat bank Century telah ditetapkan sebagai terdakwa kasus penggelapan dana nasabah. Bahkan manajemen Bank Century telah terlibat dalam memasarkan produk reksadana PT Antaboga Sekuritas yang jelas-jelas dalam pasal 10 UU Perbankan telah dilarang.

Artinya, dari segi the five C’s of credit analysis, Bank Century sebenarnya tidak layak sama sekali mendapatkan dana talangan dari LPS. Ironis nya LPS justru mengucurkan dana sampai 6,7 triliun ke bank itu!!!

Muncul pertanyaan, apa yang melatarbelakangi pemerintah memberian dana boilout tersebut??? akan kemana larinya dana bailout 6,7 triliun itu?

Jawabnya, Kemungkinan: pertama, pejabat LPS ceroboh dalam bertindak sehingga dianfaatkan oleh pejabat bank yang terafiliasi dengan partai politik tertentu. Kedua, Pajabat LPS, pejabat bank bermasalah dan partai politik tertentu bersekongkol bersekongkol mengemplang dana bailout.

Jawaban yang pasti, kita tunggu skenario politik berikutnya..

Popular posts from this blog

Eisenhower, The Top Figure Army General, The Modest President

This is a portrait of Dwight D. Eisenhower, a young dreamer, charting a course from Abilene, Kansas, to West Point and beyond. Before becoming the 34th president (two terms from 1953 to 1961), Ike –as he was called–  was a five-star general in the U.S. Army during World War II and served as Supreme Commander of the Allied Expeditionary Force in Europe. This book reveals the journey of the man who worked with incredible subtlety to move events in the direction he wished them to go. In both war and peace, he gave the world confidence in American leadership. In the war period, Ike commanded the largest multinational force ever assembled to fight German troops in leading the Western powers to victory.  During his presidency, he ended a three-year war in Korea with honor and dignity. Not a single American died in combat for the next eight years. He resisted calls for preventive war against the Soviet Union and China, faced down Khruschev over Berlin, and restored stability in Leban...

Bertrand Russell Critical Analysis on Western Philosophy

“Philosophy is something intermediate between theology and science,” said Bertrand Russell. Theology and science occupy their own territory. All definite knowledge belongs to science, all dogma as to what surpasses definite knowledge belongs to theology. Between theology and science there is No Man’s Land, exposed to attack from both sides. For that the philosophy is present. The No Man’s Land is philosophy. Then he added, “Philosophical conceptions are a product of two factors: one, inherited religious and ethical conceptions; the other, the sort of investigation which may be called ‘scientific’.” Bertrand Russell who was born in 1872, he himself was a British philosopher as well as mathematician, logician, historian, writer, and social critic. In this book, which was firstly published in 1945, Russell divided the philosophy chronologically into three parts: Ancient Philosophy, Catholic Philosophy and Modern Philosophy. This book is a widely read and influential philosophical history ...

Jesus Way Tak Segampang Busway

Jesus Way yang diartikan “cara Yesus” atau “jalan Yesus” tampaknya berupa jalan sempit dan sedikit orang menyukainya/memilihnya. Ini pernah dikatakan oleh Yesus sendiri: “ Karena sesaklah pintu dan sempitlah jalan yang menuju kepada kehidupan, dan sedikit orang yang mendapatinya .” (Matius 7:14). Semua orang, atau sebagian besar orang, memilih jalan lebar tanpa hambatan agar sebisa mungkin lebih cepat sampai tujuan. Jalan sempit hanya memperlama waktu, tidak efektif, dan tidak sesuai tuntutan zaman yang serba cepat dan instan. Sebenarnya jalan sempit tidak apa-apa asalkan lancar. Ternyata tidak. Jesus way bukan seperti jalur khusus bus atau busway di Jakarta. Busway – walaupun sempit, hanya pas untuk satu bus – memberikan privilege karena dikhususkan untuk bus tanpa ada hambatan apapun. Ikut melaju di busway enak sekali, diprioritaskan, tidak ikut ngantri bermacet-macetan di jalan. Jesus way tidak seperti busway . Dulu ada kisah seorang anak muda yang kaya raya, yang sedang mencar...