How committed is the post-New Order political elite to the anti-corruption battle that laid the foundation for reform in 1998? Some of them either fight graft half-heartedly or wage a fake war on corruption (they swore zero tolerance to corruption, but eventually were caught stealing state money).

Others show no hesitation in acting against the Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK), the linchpin of the national campaign against graft.

Taking the lead in the latest push to revise Law No. 32/2002 that will strip the KPK off key powers, the ruling Indonesian Democratic Party of Struggle (PDI-P) pays no heed to mounting denunciation from even its own constituents '€” or the fact that President Joko '€œJokowi'€ Widodo had rejected the plan when it was proposed by his law and human rights minister, Yasonna H. Laoly, in June.

Both Jokowi and Yasonna are PDI-P cadres, but the former knew he would have lost the much-needed public confidence should he approve the draft and submit it to the House of Representatives.

There is no official statement explaining why PDI-P finally took over the initiative of amending the KPK Law, except from senior politician Bambang Wuryanto, who said the PDI-P faction was implementing an order from '€œthe top commander'€. Bambang declined to confirm if he was referring to party paramount leader Megawati Soekarnoputri, who has been at loggerheads with Jokowi several times.

Efforts to amend the KPK Law with an aim to weaken the commission started in 2012, although some politicians had openly called for its dissolution even earlier.

Then-president Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono said the amendment was untimely, given the fact that the KPK and the National Police were fresh from yet another standoff following the arrest of a police general.

Such is likely the precedent of the ongoing move against the KPK, which politicians fear the most. The KPK Law revision plan cannot be separated from the third clash between the commission and the police, which stems from the naming of National Police chief candidate Comr. Gen. Budi Gunawan a graft suspect in late 2014. Then, PDI-P played a role in the onslaught of KPK by, among other things, revealing then-KPK chief Abraham Samad'€™s bid to contest the presidential election as Jokowi'€™s running mate.

The political noise has passed, but PDI-P'€™s stance on disarming the KPK has not. The KPK Law amendment appears to be timed with the selection process of the KPK leaders for the 2015-2019 term, which will soon culminate in the House'€™s vote to elect five candidates.

PDI-P and its allies wish to see a brand new KPK governed under a new law. Proponents of the amendment say the new law would ensure accountability and transparency, which the current KPK was lacking. Some have gone so far as to accuse the KPK of abuse of power because it works without an oversight mechanism.

Based on the proposed 17 new articles, an executive body and an ad hoc honorary body would be formed to supervise the KPK. The executive body members would be selected and dismissed by the President, who would be allowed to recruit them from the National Police, Attorney General'€™s Office AGO, the Supreme Audit Agency and the Communication and Information Ministry.

The executive body would spark double loyalty within the KPK and worse, lead to its loss of independence. Its members would report to KPK leaders but have their performance appraised by the President.

KPK'€™s independence should come before integrity. KPK investigators with proven integrity cannot work without independence. As scholars say, integrity is formed from habits which anyone can learn or adapt, voluntarily or by force.

The most contentious item must be the KPK'€™s wiretapping power, vital in its operations against previously untouchable big fish. The KPK, too, can investigate officials without the President'€™s consent.

Under the draft revision, the KPK would need approval from the head of the respective district court to wiretap suspects. This would enable leaking of KPK'€™s secret operations.

Worse, the draft eliminates KPK'€™s prosecution powers and revokes the article that prohibits the commission from dropping an investigation '€” while KPK prosecutors attribute their 100 percent conviction rate so far to this prohibition. Being barred from halting investigations, the KPK launches a probe only if solid evidence is secured.

Clearly the lawmakers, as well as their bosses and supporters, are blind to the fact that corruption remains deep-rooted. Indonesia'€™s position in the global corruption perception index has barely changed despite the 12-year-old KPK. So there'€™s no way we can retain a business-as-usual mindset in dealing with graft.

The lawmakers endorsing the revision claim the new law will empower the KPK, but the 17 stipulations show otherwise. The noble aim to strengthen the KPK should start with the lawmakers'€™ recognition that corruption is an extraordinary crime that requires extraordinary measures to address '€” which is why the KPK Law was passed in 2002.

The draft law should also recognize the KPK as a superbody, or else it will easily fall prey to attacks as in the three episodes of its standoff with the police, which is popularly dubbed the Cicak vs Buaya (gecko vs crocodile) saga.

To prevent the possible politicization of graft cases as feared by lawmakers, they can just transfer their power to elect KPK leaders to another institution. Politics, which can lead to compromise and back-room deals, should be absent from the selection of KPK leaders, if we envision a strong and independent anti-corruption body.
_______________________________

The author is a staff writer at The Jakarta Post

Popular

PDI-P will likely be part of opposition: Ganjar

Indonesia one step from Olympics after beating South Korea

Bahlil leads task force to boost sugar, bioethanol production in Papua