Information and Communication Minister Tifatul Sembiring has called for a regulation on wiretapping, to be handled by a single institution, pointing out that other countries have such institutions under the auspices of their communications ministries.
The call came in the wake of a corruption investigation by the Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK) - where wiretapped recordings were played back publicly by the Constitutional Court - concerning a plot by a businessman, senior police officers and high-ranking prosecutors to frame two commission deputies on trumped-up charges.
Antigraft activists said the idea of regulating wiretaps under a government institution was simply another effort to weaken the commission's work amid the national anticorruption campaign.
Give us your opinion on the best strategy to regulate wiretapping and prevent institutions from abusing their wiretapping authority.
We received only CON responses. - Editor
Let graft commission do the work
FENI F.
School of Journalism
Padjadjaran University, Bandung
In my opinion, when wiretapping is handled by a government institution, it will definitely weaken the Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK) and the anticorruption campaign in general.
KPK is an independent body and when government, in this case the Information and Communication Ministry, started to enter their territory, I can say that it will no longer be an independent body.
We will never know the motives behind the idea of regulating wiretapping under the ministry, but I am afraid that there will be some hidden agenda and interests involved, thus disturbing corruption eradication efforts.
Maybe the objective of the government is to restrict and control it, but when the KPK thinks a case needs to be wiretapped, then they must have strong evidence for doing it.
If the government wants to wiretap, of course they can do it, but for corruptors, let the KPK do the work.
The KPK so far has performed well. Yes, maybe there are still corrupt officials out there, but the KPK needs great evidence to prove that they really are corruptors and wiretapping is a mean to get that evidence.
So I strongly reject the idea of wiretapping in corruption cases regulated under the government institution only. This will also hamper the efforts to eradicate corruption.
The independence of the KPK at stake
ROMMY KHARISMA KARINDON
Student of Jenderal Soedirman University
Purwokerto, Central Java
The independence of the KPK, the key of its success so far, will be on the line if the communication ministry takes control over the authority to wiretap conversations in a corruption investigation.
If the government holds control (over the use of wiretapping procedure), the question is: will it ensure the KPK's better performance?
In my opinion, the need for the KPK to propose a procedure to the government would only make the last bastion of fighting corruption less reliable. When the investigation process itself was less reliable, the KPK could lose its integrity and people's trust.
The government must have strong reason why it should take over the wiretapping authority. Is there anything wrong with the current procedure? Is there any misuse of wiretapping conducted by the KPK?
I think any institution carrying out the wiretapping procedure, or in this case the KPK, should seek approval from the court to use the taped conversation as evidence in its investigation.
NEXT TOPIC:
The National Police discharged 365 officers and fined over 3,000 others for involvement in, among others, adultery, illegal drugs, robbery and shooting cases. Chief Gen. Bambang Hendarso Danuri said that the force continued to step up both internal and external supervision to increase police officer discipline.
He said external supervision was conducted by independent institutions, including the National Police Commission, the Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK) and a number of civic groups such as the Indonesia Corruption Watch (ICW) and the Commission for Missing Persons and Victims of Violence (Kontras). The activists, however, criticized the half-hearted reform of the police institution, saying it did not reach the heart of the issues. They said the institution have a poor response to public reports.
Whatever your stance is, give us your opinion on why a bureaucratic reform should be undertaken at the police institution.
Send us your opinion in 300 words. The best opinions would be published on Feb. 21.
