TheJakartaPost
Please Update your browser
Your browser is out of date, and may not be compatible with our website. A list of the most popular web browsers can be found below.
Just click on the icons to get to the download page.
Is the Constitutional Court just as corrupt as the others?
It may sound comical or cynical, but Constitutional Court chief Mahfud MD has set a good example in governance transparency, a rare luxury in these days of our fledging democracy
Change Size
I
t may sound comical or cynical, but Constitutional Court chief Mahfud MD has set a good example in governance transparency, a rare luxury in these days of our fledging democracy.
Mahfud challenged law pundit Refly Harun to form and chair a fact-finding team assigned to investigate his (Refly’s) accusation that the Constitutional Court may be just as corrupt as regular courts because some judges there have allegedly accepted bribes.
Refly, a Constitutional Court expert staff member between 2003 and 2007, has reportedly taken up Mahfud’s challenge. Refly, a lecturer at Indonusa Esa Unggul University, Jakarta, told the media he meant the criticism to help maintain the Court’s reputation.
So he will have about one month to prove he was not bluffing when he wrote his allegations in an op-ed piece in the Oct. 25 edition of the newspaper Kompas.
In his article, Refly said that a Papuan official said during a meeting that it would cost a regional official between Rp 10 billion (US$1.12 million) and Rp 12 billion to win a local electoral dispute taken to the Constitutional Court.
Refly also claimed he witnessed someone handing over Rp 1 billion in cash to a Constitutional Court judge. He also claimed to have had first-hand information from a person who said he had been asked by a Constitutional Court judge to pay Rp 1 billion to ensure a favorable ruling, but the person missed the deadline and the transaction did not happen.
Mahfud, whom Refly described as a man of integrity, promised he would personally hand over any of his judges to the Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK) if he received convincing evidence they had taken a bribe.
The modest Court chief has been doing everything in his power to portray himself and the Court as uncorruptable. When rumors about corruption at the court began to circulate last month, he swiftly called a media briefing to clarify them.
He challenged anyone who had solid evidence to come forward. He promised to fund their trip to Jakarta and pay for their hotel bills.
“As of this hour, 12:46 p.m. of Oct. 19, we are 100 percent clean,” he declared.
It’s interesting that since then nobody has come forward and pointed a finger at any of the court’s judges.
However, it would be too naïve to accept Mahfud’s declaration as nothing but the truth because there could be 1,000 reasons why witnesses or actors — if there are any — are reluctant to blow the whistle.
There would be a huge personal risk and expense involved in taking any evidence to court.
But somehow, his tactic to convince the public has worked remarkably well. This is not the kind of action that a public official with questionable integrity would likely take.
This should serve as a good lesson for anyone as courageous as Refly to accuse an institution of corruption to get proof first.
Given that Refly was once a long-time Court insider, his revelations must bee seen as credible — until the planned investigations prove them otherwise.
If only leaders of other state institutions had Mahfud’s courage and wit!
The author is a staff writer at The Jakarta Post.
