House of Representatives Speaker Ade Komarudin of the Golkar Party said the arrest would negatively affect the proposal to strengthen the DPD’s authority in the lawmaking process.

“I’m afraid that following the Irman case, the plan to grant the DPD more power will trigger public concern,” Ade said on Monday.

As a consequence of his arrest, Irman could also lose his speaker’s position as the DPD ethics council has the power to dismiss him.

DPD ethics council chairman AM Fatwa said the dismissal of Irman was justified under Article 52 of DPD internal regulations, which provides for the removal of any DPD member who is named a suspect in a criminal case.

“This case is a blow to our institution, but we must follow the regulations. I actually suggest that Irman immediately resign instead of waiting for the ethics council to dishonorably dismiss him,” Fatwa said.

The arrest took place amid the DPD’s effort to secure more legislative power through a constitutional amendment. As reported previously, the People’s Consultative Assembly (MPR) plans to reinstate the former state policy guidelines to increase the DPD’s influence.

The DPD, a branch of the nation’s legislative body representing the provinces, has demanded equal rights to the House, another branch of the legislative body representing political parties, in formulating legislation, budgets and supervising the government.

Political parties in the House are reluctant to share power with the DPD in lawmaking, budgeting and supervision and Irman’s case is likely to strengthen the House’s hand.

“How can we amend [the councilors’ authority] given this situation? But we agree that the case has nothing to do with the DPD’s authority. It bears no relation,” said Golkar politician Rambe Kamarulzaman, who is also a member of the MPR team in charge of drafting the amendment.

Deputy chairman of the NasDem Party faction, Johnny G. Plate, said Irman’s graft case was a personal matter and bore no relation to the council’s authority. He, however, said strengthening the DPD authority would improve nothing.

As the regional representative body, the DPD has no role in export-import policy, the issue in which Irman has been implicated.

The DPD has little authority in lawmaking, as the Constitution and Legislative Law only gives the councilors the authority to propose recommendations. They have no voice in decision-making.

However, as the leader of a public institution, Irman is regarded as an influential stakeholder.

“The DPD is one of the highest state institutions. No matter the position, it’s still influential. Although the Constitution gives them limited authority, the councilors still have access and relations,” said Siti Zuhro, political analyst at the Indonesian Institute of Sciences (LIPI).

Separately, the Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK) has said it is investigating whether Irman collected bribes from agencies other than the State Logistics Agency (Bulog) in the case it is currently investigating.

Irman, who hails from West Sumatra, was allegedly caught red-handed on Saturday accepting Rp 100 million (US$ 7,600) from sugar-importing company CV Semesta Berjaya president director Xaveriandy Sutanto, who is also a defendant in another case, for Irman’s services in helping the company get the sugar import quota allocated for West Sumatra from Bulog.

Bulog is not an agency under the supervision of the DPD and the latter has no budgetary authority such as the House has, but the KPK has accused Irman of using his influence as a DPD member representing West Sumatra to informally lobby for the sugar-importation quota from Bulog.

Popular

Indonesia may offer dual citizenship to attract overseas workers, minister says

Ministry unveils new funding initiative for climate-resilient health system

Sri Mulyani vows to improve customs services