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.
Insight: The year the KPK was destroyed — and realism for the anticorruption struggle
If we want the diversity of interests to be governed democratically as an order, politics — instead of tyranny — makes up our human condition. Diversity of interests makes the adversarial nature of politics inescapable. An irony torments our wish; in politics, nothing prevents us from setbacks or decay despite our best efforts. This is what happened in the KPK Law revision.
Change Size
2019 may be remembered as the year the Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK) and antigraft activists fought a losing battle. (JP/Donny Fernando)
A
t the height of the fracas over the Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK) Law last September, an unknown sender asked me on WhatsApp, “Where do you stand?” At the time I had exposed myself to literature on political realism, an attempt to steer my teaching duty in political philosophy away from the excess of obscurantism that often infects the study of philosophy.
Political realism is not a mere bow to the immediate. Rather, it is a critical stand against the idea that what is good is set in paradise and that our task is simply to apply it to particular fields. Vigilance is key: The good can only be conceived of in the mesh of competing interests that make up the fabric of politics. What has this to do with the KPK Law revision?
The revision is heinous. From the Regulatory Impact Assessment, its harms are grave, as cited by my colleague, Rimawan Pradiptyo, an economist from Gadjah Mada University. It makes no difference whether it was done by a lone raider or through a concert of political grandees — the police and legislators.
Only a few months earlier, the Constitutional Court relieved us of electoral wrangles between the two contending presidential camps. With the blatant raid on the KPK, the relief turned into an insult.
The societal polarization bred by religious sentiments and the assault on KPK independence are two conspicuous signposts that point to what to expect in the coming year. The first has been widely noted, the second warrants a mention.
We want the economy and the laws to be shielded from political fluctuations. This is also what we want for the KPK. Its nonpartisan standard and mode of operation should be insulated from political vicissitudes. Alas, neither Indonesian politics nor the KPK were made in heaven. A dose of realism is warranted.
If we want the diversity of interests to be governed democratically as an order, politics — instead of tyranny — makes up our human condition. Diversity of interests makes the adversarial nature of politics inescapable. An irony torments our wish; in politics, nothing prevents us from setbacks or decay despite our best efforts. This is what happened in the KPK Law revision.
