Indonesia Corruption Watch’s (ICW) recent report on the downward trend in prison terms meted out to graft convicts in 2015 is not quite earth-shaking, yet it is still a wake-up call.

Analyzing the litigation of 524 graft cases involving 564 defendants throughout 2015, the corruption watchdog found that last year’s prison sentences for corruption convicts averaged 26 months, down from 30 months in 2014.

Combined with the House of Representatives’ continual efforts to incapacitate the Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK), the uptrend adds to skepticism about the country’s resolve in rooting out the acute corruption involving state officials, politicians and businesses. It also raises question about the common perception that corruption is an extraordinary crime that threatens not only the economy, but also national security. The public sense of justice is also grossly violated.

Consistent light prison terms can be a symptom of judges and prosecutors’ lack of awareness that corruption is an extraordinary crime and hence requires extraordinary measures to combat it. This appalling condition persists partly because, as ICW’s Danang Widoyoko rightly pointed out at a seminar, the judicial system, where judges are groomed, is also corrupt. This makes them look at corruption just as they would at any other crime, such as stealing a goat.

As ICW has revealed, the whole affair is more complex than many think. It turns out that the corruption court judges have “good” legal grounds to extend brief prison terms. Their reference is none other than Law No. 31/1999 on corruption, which has never been amended.

The minimum sentence for state officials found guilty of abuse of power is one year (Article 3), one quarter of the minimum jail sentence for corrupt non-state officials (Article 2). So don’t be surprised if many state officials found guilty of stealing billions of rupiah in public funds have had to spend only a few years behind bars before they are set free, still filthy rich, and laugh all the way to the bank.

Besides, there are a million ways for the inmates to have their prison terms cut. Government Regulation No 99/2012 allows graft convicts to obtain remissions as long as they have already settled the fine and/or restitution as ordered by the court.

Oh, even easier: Convicts are entitled to remissions for “good” behavior, as judged by prison wardens.

Of late, the KPK has its doors wide open for graft suspects to become “partners” as justice collaborators. All they need to do is to confess and help unravel the case by detailing the roles of other people. In return, the KPK will seek a shorter prison sentence.

Throughout last year, ICW counted only four convicts who received prison terms of more than 10 years. Ex-Democratic Party chief Anas Urbaningrum got 14 years in the misappropriation of funds for the Hambalang sports complex project. The regent of Klungkung, Bali, I Wayan Candra was incarcerated for 12 years for embezzling funds earmarked for port construction. PT Sanjico Abadi president director Asep Aaan Priandi handed a 12-year sentence in a health equipment procurement case. Finally, PT MAPNA Indonesia boss Mohammad Bahalwan was sentenced to 11 years in a corruption case at state-owned PLN.

Arasdila Caesar, a member of ICW’s litigation monitoring division, argues that the light sentences happened because, unlike prosecutors, judges did not have verdict guidelines for graft defendants.

“We found wildly different verdicts for similar cases. Some got hefty sentences and others light punishment,” he says.

 A South Sulawesi civil servant, Isman Idul Fitriansyah, was sentenced to four years for causing state losses of Rp 15 million (US$1,150). Meanwhile, South Nias deputy regent Hukuasa Ndruru got only two years for a graft case that incurred almost Rp 10 billion in losses to the state.

This sort of discrepancy only adds credence to the widely accepted axiom that the more money you steal, the shorter jail term you are likely to receive.

More astonishing yet is Law No. 8/2015 on elections, which allows one-time criminal convicts to run for legislative and executive posts as long as the offenses they committed do not carry a mandatory prison term of five years or more. That explains why some criminal suspects ran in last year’s historic simultaneous regional elections, and ironically won. Only recidivists are prohibited from running for executive and legislative office.

And it is equally intriguing that many graft suspects have received jail terms of less than five years, usually four or four-and-a-half years. Could it mean that the very kind judges intend to allow the convicts to run for political posts once they leave penitentiary?

And this red-carpet treatment for graft suspects and ex-convicts has been perfected by General Elections Commission (KPU) Decree No. 9/2015, which gives former criminal convicts the liberty to run for executive and legislative positions with one requirement: They should publicly and honestly disclose their past.

A famous case in point is M. Taufik, the sitting Jakarta City Council deputy speaker. He was sentenced to 18 months in 2006 for a graft case that caused the state to suffer a loss of Rp 488 million when he chaired the city’s election commission overseeing the 2004 general elections.

Whether you love it or loath it, Indonesia has a unique way to honor graft convicts.
________________________________

The author is a staff writer at The Jakarta Post.

Popular

Emirates Group books record $5.1 bn annual profit

Is Indonesia really ready to embrace dual citizenship?

Citizenship duel