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.
In Indonesia, corruption 'subsidized' by taxpayers: Researcher
Change text size
Gift Premium Articles
to Anyone
Share the best of The Jakarta Post with friends, family, or colleagues. As a subscriber, you can gift 3 to 5 articles each month that anyone can read—no subscription needed!
Bener Meriah Regent Ruslan Abdul Ghani, a corruption suspect in a 2011 Aceh port project, boards a prisoner transportation vehicle after undergoing questioning at the Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK) office in Jakarta on March 16. (ANTARA FOTO/M Agung Rajasa)
F
ines and penalties levied on corruption convicts are far lower than the losses that they cause, indicating that the losses are indirectly “subsidized” by taxpayers, research shows.
According to a study by Gadjah Mada University, Rp 21.26 trillion was paid in penalties and fines by corruption convicts between 2001 and 2015. The amount is far lower than the state losses caused by corruption, which stood at Rp 203.9 trillion.
"There is Rp 182.64 trillion worth of unrecovered losses. Who bears the cost of the 'subsidy'? It is diligent taxpayers and even generations who are not even born yet," said Gadjah Mada University researcher Rimawan Pradiptyo in Jakarta on Tuesday.
The university team exposed another irony -- those who stole larger amounts of state funds were fined less than people who stole less. Corruption convicts who caused state losses of less than Rp 10 million paid fines 3.43 percent higher than the incurred losses.
"On the other side, those causing state losses of above Rp 25 billion were fined only 8.3 percent of the losses incurred," Rimawan said.
The result of the research is in line with Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK) findings that the country incurred losses from four costs of corruption.
First, the nominal value of the money stolen. Second, the economic opportunity lost because of corruption. Third, the preventive costs such as for bureaucratic reform. Fourth, the eradication costs, such as for court proceedings, investigations and processing.
Based on the type of case, the KPK mostly handled bribery cases comprising 224 cases of all 468 corruption cases under KPK investigation. Next, procurements and budget violation cases with 142 (30 percent) and 44 (10 percent), cases respectively.
Based on profession, 32 percent or 167 of 518 KPK detainees were politicians. Private employees and civil servants followed at 128 (25 percent) and 123 (24 percent) people, respectively. (ags)
