A

recent proposal to pass a motion to launch an inquiry into tax corruption marks another chapter in the saga of heightened political bickering between the government and legislators.

But it may well turn out that the politicians have more tricks up their sleeves.

The controversy surrounding the recent sale of shares of state steel company PT Krakatau Steel through an initial public offering (IPO) is another card worth playing.

The IPO has caused a political rift between members of the ruling coalition camp of President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono, triggered by allegations that officials from the Office of the Minister for State Enterprises had undervalued the share prices so that politicians and well-connected businesspeople near Yudhoyono could buy the majority of the shares and then sell them for a hefty profit.

Krakatau sold 20 percent of its shares to the public in early November, pocketing around Rp 2.68 trillion (US$297 million) in proceeds.

The shares were sold at Rp 850 per piece, lower than a valuation of Rp 1,250 arrived at by independent consultant PricewaterhouseCoopers, which was hired by the Office of the Minister for State Enterprises to value the company’s shares fairly.

The House of Representatives’ Commission XI for financial affairs deputy chair Harry Azhar Azis said it would take several months before legislators could form a special committee to investigate the case.

Legislators will need to hold several hearings with Minister for State-owned Enterprises Mustafa Abubakar before calling in the Supreme Audit Agency (BPK) to launch an audit of the IPO.

A BPK audit would take at least three months.

However, BPK member Rizal Djalil said the agency had yet to receive an official audit request from the House related to the Krakatau IPO.

According to Harry, the commission would prioritize discussion on the proposed “tax mafia” investigation because that would have a larger impact on the public compared to the Krakatau IPO case.

While the Krakatau case is surely being saved as yet another bargaining chip that could be used against Yudhoyono, politicians have already kept the President fairly occupied with demands to follow up the results of the Bank Century inquiry committee formed in late 2009.

The committee was the first outcome of an escalated political rift between the House and the government.

The committee was set up following a whopping bailout worth Rp 6.7 trillion (US$716 million) to salvage the small but ailing Bank Century during the height of the 2008 global financial crisis.

The bailout was authorized by then Finance Minister Sri Mulyani Indrawati and then Bank Indonesia governor Boediono, who is now Vice President.

While politicians insisted the committee was aimed at improving the government’s accountability many believed it was merely a form of pressure to force reformed-minded Sri Mulyani out of the Cabinet.

Sri Mulyani left the Cabinet in May 2010 to become one of the World Bank’s managing directors.

After the outcome of the committee was finalized in March last year, little has been followed up by the government, which has left the legislators with more ammunition for further attacks aimed at government’s perceived lack of seriousness in settling the Bank Century case.

Since then, only Rp 295 billion, or 4 percent, of the bank’s assets have been recovered by the government.

Law enforcers have only prosecuted Mukhammad Misbakhun, a legislator from the Prosperous Justice Party (PKS), in the case.

Former shareholders of the bank Robert Tantular, Hesham Al Warraq and Rafat Ali Rizfi, and several executives were prosecuted long before the inquiry committee was set up.

Analysts believe the tax mafia inquiry committee and a follow up to the Bank Century case are merely a political maneuver by political parties to strengthen their bargaining power with Yudhoyono.

Since his reelection in mid 2009, Yudhoyono has been unable to keep his own coalition camp intact due to various vested interest plaguing its politicians.

Purwo Santosa, a political observer from Yogyakarta-based Gadjah Mada University, said that although he agreed with the House’s right to form inquiries to supervise government policies, there should be strong grounds and evidence to assure the public that such a move was not just political maneuvering.