(published by The Jakarta Post on 21 Jan 2015. Click here)
The government’s stance as stated on Saturday by
Coordinating Political, Legal and Security Affairs Minister Tedjo Edhy
Purdijatno that President Joko “Jokowi” Widodo will have to inaugurate Comr.
Gen. Budi Gunawan as National Police chief to avoid conflict with the House of
Representatives was difficult to understand.
This is unacceptable logic because at the same time the President would have to ignore the status of Budi, who has been named a suspect in a bribery case by the Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK).Previously, in the administration of former president Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono, a minister had to step down right away if named a suspect by the KPK. This was experienced by Andi Mallarangeng, Suryadharma Ali and lastly, Jero Wacik. If now the President is inaugurating someone who has already been named a suspect, how does the logic work?
We know the President is now in a difficult position after the House endorsed Budi to take the helm of the National Police, but we should not perceive that it is the KPK which put him in that situation. The Financial Transaction Reports and Analysis Centre (PPATK) also opposed Budi’s nomination because his name was one of those red-flagged after being submitted by Jokowi last October for clearance from the KPK and PPATK in the selection process of his Cabinet ministers.
How come Jokowi was so persistent in nominating Budi? His name was on the list and Jokowi should not forget that. Didn’t he commit to making his administration clean, as promised during his presidential campaign? He should not forget that either. We think the same. There are “obvious” invisible whisperers who he has to listen to.
“The KPK cannot act like a superpower. The KPK doesn’t have a code of ethics,” Tedjo said previously. What code of ethics you are referring to, Mr. Minister? Is it the KPK that is trying to help Jokowi in running his clean government that you accuse of lacking ethics, or those who oppose the KPK?
Tedjo made comparisons and complained that the KPK did nothing when former vice president Boediono was inaugurated in 2009 despite allegations of his involvement in a graft case centering on the Bank Century bailout. The minister’s argument was not appropriate when comparing the two cases. Let alone in 2009, until now we never heard that Boediono had a suspicious flow of transactions indicating bribery or corruption in the Bank Century scandal. Perhaps the KPK as well as PPATK found nothing that indicated any suspicious transaction flow in his bank accounts. Thus, the only reason to prosecute Boediono — if it has to be done — is the decision made by Bank Indonesia (BI) to bail out Bank Century because Boediono was BI governor at that time. But blaming the decision on government policy is politically motivated and it is not the KPK’s domain.
The KPK, as well as the public, is asked to uphold the principle of the presumption of innocence, but we know this principle has often been used as a hiding place for those who commit corruption in this country. Please note, in many cases, when the KPK names someone a suspect, there is no way to escape. All indictments are always proven, that’s the KPK’s reputation, at least until today.
Serpong, 21 Jan 2015
Titus J.
This is unacceptable logic because at the same time the President would have to ignore the status of Budi, who has been named a suspect in a bribery case by the Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK).Previously, in the administration of former president Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono, a minister had to step down right away if named a suspect by the KPK. This was experienced by Andi Mallarangeng, Suryadharma Ali and lastly, Jero Wacik. If now the President is inaugurating someone who has already been named a suspect, how does the logic work?
We know the President is now in a difficult position after the House endorsed Budi to take the helm of the National Police, but we should not perceive that it is the KPK which put him in that situation. The Financial Transaction Reports and Analysis Centre (PPATK) also opposed Budi’s nomination because his name was one of those red-flagged after being submitted by Jokowi last October for clearance from the KPK and PPATK in the selection process of his Cabinet ministers.
How come Jokowi was so persistent in nominating Budi? His name was on the list and Jokowi should not forget that. Didn’t he commit to making his administration clean, as promised during his presidential campaign? He should not forget that either. We think the same. There are “obvious” invisible whisperers who he has to listen to.
“The KPK cannot act like a superpower. The KPK doesn’t have a code of ethics,” Tedjo said previously. What code of ethics you are referring to, Mr. Minister? Is it the KPK that is trying to help Jokowi in running his clean government that you accuse of lacking ethics, or those who oppose the KPK?
Tedjo made comparisons and complained that the KPK did nothing when former vice president Boediono was inaugurated in 2009 despite allegations of his involvement in a graft case centering on the Bank Century bailout. The minister’s argument was not appropriate when comparing the two cases. Let alone in 2009, until now we never heard that Boediono had a suspicious flow of transactions indicating bribery or corruption in the Bank Century scandal. Perhaps the KPK as well as PPATK found nothing that indicated any suspicious transaction flow in his bank accounts. Thus, the only reason to prosecute Boediono — if it has to be done — is the decision made by Bank Indonesia (BI) to bail out Bank Century because Boediono was BI governor at that time. But blaming the decision on government policy is politically motivated and it is not the KPK’s domain.
The KPK, as well as the public, is asked to uphold the principle of the presumption of innocence, but we know this principle has often been used as a hiding place for those who commit corruption in this country. Please note, in many cases, when the KPK names someone a suspect, there is no way to escape. All indictments are always proven, that’s the KPK’s reputation, at least until today.
Serpong, 21 Jan 2015
Titus J.
Comments