By: Indra Herlambang
KPK’s law enforcement efforts against former Commissioner of the General Election Commission (KPU) Wahyu Setiawan are considered to violate procedures and are full of political interests. The public suspected that there was another motive behind the arrest.
Wednesday 8 January 2020, the Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK) has arrested one of the KPK commissioners, Wahyu Wahyudi. The arrest was related to the alleged bribery involving Wahyu. But the arrest seemed to still raise questions.
Karyono Wibowo as a political observer from the Indonesian Public Institute (IPI), himself requested that the Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK) institute provide clarification related to the circulation of an investigative warrant (SPRIN LIDIK) Operation Catching Hands (OTT) on Wahyu Setiawan as a KPU commissioner with a case charge. bribery for the arrangement of the Interchange of Time Members of the Republic of Indonesia DPR PDI-Perjuangan faction.
The SPRIN. The investigation referred to by Karyono is related to OTT Wahyu Setiawan numbered 146/01/12/2019 and was signed by Agus Raharjo on December 20, 2019.
The SPRIN. The investigation was aimed at the names of KPK investigators. In fact, on the same occasion the commissioners and the Supervisory Board (Dewas) of the 2019-2023 KPK had been officially inaugurated by President Joko Widodo.
He considered the need for clarification related to the OTT investigation of the KPU commissioners. Because the order was signed by KPK chairman Agus Rahardjo on December 20, 2019, Karyono suspected that this was an attempt by the KPK to avoid the KPK Dewas license.
If the KPK Sprin circulating is true, Karyono considered that this could lead to negative perceptions for the KPK. The public will conclude as if there are other targets behind law enforcement efforts.
Karyono said that the circulation of a letter similar to Sprin. Investigation from the KPK institution related to the KPU commissioner bribery case, would certainly add to the series of events that alleged the leak of Sprin Lidik that had happened before. According to him, this can actually undermine public trust in the KPK institution.
In addition, Karyono also explained a number of events related to the determination of a number of corruption suspects through Operation Catching Hands (OTT) conducted in the midst of a political battle in which the KPK named regional head candidates as suspects shortly after being appointed as regional head candidates by the local KPUD and OTT against A party cadre in the middle of the momentum of a large agenda of certain political parties which is carried out repeatedly and has invited public questions because it seems to have become a pattern by the KPK.
This affirms an allegation that besides carrying out political maneuvers by capitalizing the KKN case. So do not let the OTT conducted by the KPK become a procedural or administrative defect.
Because after all, all policies would require rules to make things more productive.
However, he said, the KPU commissioner OTT case had to be processed because there were already at least 2 pieces of evidence.
Karyono also added that in Indonesia law enforcement is indeed a necessity and corruption eradication must be done. However, he said that as a law enforcement agency, the KPK certainly could not maneuver like a political party.
On different occasions, intelligence and security observer Stanislaus Riyanta, said there needed to be an administrative evaluation at the KPK especially if the KPK investigation warrant related to the KPU commissioner OTT was true. Because, according to him, such an administration can be considered to look for loopholes for certain purposes.
Stanislaus said, eradicating corruption must be done and anyone involved in corruption must be dealt with firmly. But in its efforts of course the anti-rasuah institute must pay attention to the applicable rules including compliance with procedures and administration.
Previously, we must also know that the supervisory board (dewas) has the authority to grant a search, seizure and wiretapping permit in a case. The supervisory board is also authorized to draw up a code of ethics for KPK leaders and employees.
The supervisory board itself is actually regulated in article 37B for law Number 19 of 2019 (KPK Law). Where there are a number of tasks and authorities regulated in the revised KPK Law.
The formation of the KPK’s supervisory board as proposed by the DPR was also to strengthen the KPK so as to avoid the slanted assumption that has occurred so far that the KPK only resolves ‘case’ cases.
Of course, the existence of OTT against KPU commissioner Wahyu Setiawan, made the public unaware that political drama could occur at any time.