One of the most effective justice sector institutions in Indonesia is the Corruption Eradication Comission (KPK), established in December 2002. The KPK demonstrates what can be achieved when the different function of investigation and prosecution are coordinated. Moreover, it works with a specialized anti-corruption court, with appeals to an anti-corruption chamber in the Supreme Court. Both the court and the chamber are dominated by a majority of ad hoc judges whoser reputation for honesty is well known.
However, in edcember 2006, the Constitutional Court struck down the law creating the anti-corruption court on the grounds that it was not created as part of the Law on the Courts, but allowed the anti-corruptin courts to continue to function in the meantime. The Parliament set itself a deadline of March 2009 to pass the new law. This was then extended to September. Many legislators have been arrested by the KPK and convicted in the anti-corruption court, leading some to qauestion if the Parliament lacks motivation to pass this law.
The KPK consistently gets convictions in the corruption cases, showing what can be done with clean courts, professional investigation, and effective prosecutors. But this kind of successful cooperation is certainly an exception. Their consistent convictions raise the bar for the police, the attorney general's office, and the courts. Indonesia needs coordinated, bold leadership if it is to get out of the corruption quagmire. Better coordination between police and prosecutors is essential. They should have both the technology and the legal means to obtain wire taps and recordings the way the KPK does to obtain convictions in corruption cases.
However, in edcember 2006, the Constitutional Court struck down the law creating the anti-corruption court on the grounds that it was not created as part of the Law on the Courts, but allowed the anti-corruptin courts to continue to function in the meantime. The Parliament set itself a deadline of March 2009 to pass the new law. This was then extended to September. Many legislators have been arrested by the KPK and convicted in the anti-corruption court, leading some to qauestion if the Parliament lacks motivation to pass this law.
The KPK consistently gets convictions in the corruption cases, showing what can be done with clean courts, professional investigation, and effective prosecutors. But this kind of successful cooperation is certainly an exception. Their consistent convictions raise the bar for the police, the attorney general's office, and the courts. Indonesia needs coordinated, bold leadership if it is to get out of the corruption quagmire. Better coordination between police and prosecutors is essential. They should have both the technology and the legal means to obtain wire taps and recordings the way the KPK does to obtain convictions in corruption cases.
No comments:
Post a Comment