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.
Out-of-court settlement for graft possible
In 2017, state losses resulting from corruption totaled US$455 million, and the number of graft suspects went up to 1,298 from 1,101 in the previous year.
Change Size
A handcuffed man offering bribe. (Shutterstock/File)
N
ational Police detective chief Comr. Gen. Ari Dono Sukmanto recently sparked controversy by stating that a corruption case might be withdrawn if the suspects could restitute the state losses. Furthermore, the draft amendment of the Criminal Code now being deliberated at the House of Representatives prescribes the same mechanism.
Corruption watchdogs like the Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK) and the Indonesia Corruption Watch (ICW) oppose out-of-court settlement, saying returning the stolen money would not write off the crime.
I believe both parties share the same purpose of fighting corruption, but use different approaches.
Certainly, Indonesia is still struggling to combat corruption. In 2017, state losses resulting from corruption totaled US$455 million, and the number of graft suspects went up to 1,298 from 1,101 in the previous year. Indonesia’s ranking also dropped from 90th to 96th out of 175 countries surveyed in the global Corruption Perceptions Index. Meanwhile, restitution of stolen state money was not commensurate with the law enforcement budget.
Notwithstanding the controversy, the United States has successfully implemented out-of-court settlements for white-collar crimes, including corruption, with the purpose of returning stolen state money and punishing the wrongdoers.
An out-of-court settlement is a viable alternative often utilized by the US Department of Justice because the result is more predictable, efficient and effective in returning the stolen money. This should overcome the main problem with most corruption cases in Indonesia, which is the lack of proportionality between attempts of restitution and the legal costs to investigate and prosecute individuals in court.
The process of out-of-court settlement is more efficient, and the result for money restitution is more significant than a court verdict.
