By: Iqbal Fadillah )*
The 212 Alumni Brotherhood Reunion was held on December 2, 2019. The Chairman of the 212 Alumni Presidium, Slamet Ma’arif, confirmed that he had obtained a permit to use the National Monument (Monas) as the venue for the event and several figures who were invited but certainly were not attended by Defense Minister Prabowo Subianto, due to a visit to Turkey. While several figures confirmed by the Committee will be present including Hidayat Nur Wahid, Fadli Zon and Prof. Didin Hafidhuddin.
But reported by Kompas.com, the Head of the Monas Regional Management Unit (UPK), M. Isa Sarnuri, said that his party could not yet issue a permit for the 212 Alumni Brotherhood (PA) to hold a Munajat or a grand reunion in the region. The letter is still being processed because the event which will be held the second time has a large mass. Moreover, until now the police have not issued a crowd permit for the event.
Reunion 212 still caused polemics among State Leaders and the general public. Even the General Chairperson of the Indonesian Ulema Council (MUI), who currently serves as the Vice President of the Republic of Indonesia, once criticized the 212 reunion activities as not showing tausyiah material in general, but rather tends to be of an agitational nature, thus raising mutual suspicion. Ma’ruf Amin even reminded that the problem that became the root of the problem that triggered the 212 action in 2016 has been completed, because Basuki Tjahja Purnama (Ahok) has been jailed for religious harassment cases.
It is rather difficult not to argue that the reunion of 212 is not politically charged. In fact, the Ministry of Home Affairs, Tito Karnavian expressed that only 212 movements were obstacles in maintaining Indonesia’s political stability. The statement was delivered by the former National Police Chief while laughing in the National Conference of the Association of Indonesian Provincial Governments (APPSI) in 2019. However, the Chairman of the 212 Alumni Presidium, Slamet Ma’arif claimed that the 212 reunion was a Muslim fraternity movement in Indonesia. According to him, the 212 group has now returned to the moral movement to fight religious blasphemers, and continue to struggle to uphold justice in Indonesia.
Apart from the pros and cons of reunion 212, an interesting thing that needs to be highlighted is the collection of funds on behalf of the people by the reunion committee 212. The alleged money laundering case had ensnared the Chairman of the GNPF MUI (now changing GNPF Ulama), Bachtiar Nasir in the Yayassan Justice for All account accommodating donations for the November 4 (411) and 2 December (212) Acts of 2017. At that time, the account of the Justice for All Foundation chaired by Adnin Armas was temporarily borrowed by the GNPF MUI to accommodate the funds of the donors of the 411 and 212. action funds. 3.8 billion.
Likewise 212 Reunion in 2018 which claimed to be followed by around 8 million people, Treasurer of the Great Reunion 212, Supriyad reported Kabar24.com said that the 212 Great Reunion Committee still had debts to several parties. Supriyadi revealed that if the operational costs of the 212 Great Reunion event were calculated, it was estimated that around Rp 1 billion. Meanwhile, Chairman of the 212th Reunion Akbar Organizing Committee, Bernard Abdul Jabar emphasized that there was not even a single penny from external donations, including from the presidential / vice presidential candidate pair participating in the 2019 Presidential Election. According to him, the contributors came from various backgrounds, from the lower to middle classes. to the top.
The initial trigger of the 212 movement for alleged cases of religious harassment by Ahok caused sympathetic feelings from the community to participate in the name of the Religious Defendant Act. From that situation then emerged community groups, institutions or foundations that accommodate public funds to then be used to accommodate actions initiated by by the Movement 212. But the question is, what aspects must be considered in raising public funds. Because this is important in order to avoid misappropriation of public funds. There needs to be an arrangement because there are donor rights to determine the use of public funds collected by PA 212.
Seeing various problems related to the use of public funds in the 212 action, as an institution that carries out public fundraising, the PA 212 Committee has not fully paid adequate attention to the importance of donor rights. Behind an institution conducting public fundraising activities, there is an obligation to pay attention to the rights of donors. The Donor Bill of Rights includes, 1) The right to know the mission of the donated organization, the goals, and the organization’s ability to use donations; 2) The right to know those who sit on the boards of donated organizations, and ask the supervisory board to carefully assess the responsibilities of the board of directors; 3) The right to receive transparent organizational financial statements; 4) The right to certainty that donations are spent on matters mutually agreed upon; 5) The right to obtain certainty that donations are managed properly and in accordance with applicable law; 6) The right to know whether the party asking for donations is an organization staff or volunteer; 7) The right to have the freedom to ask questions and receive answers quickly, correctly and honestly; 8) The right to request that the donor’s name is not publicly announced and that the donor has the right to receive proper recognition and appreciation.
Therefore, funds raised by the 212 Reunion Committee should be audited by a competent institution. In auditing public funds, the audit process must be carried out on 4 (four) things, namely, Audit of Fund Revenue, Audit of Fund Allocation, Audit of Fund Spending and Audit of Fund Management.
The essence of an audit of public funds is to determine whether financial management and control have been supported by clear evidence. From this audit too, the public came to understand where and from where the funds were from community contributions for the collection of funds for various actions 212, so that there was no misuse of the funds of the people.
)* The author is a social political observer