President Jokowi Refuses Some Substance of the Material for the Revision of the KPK Law
By: Dodik Prasetyo )*
The revision of the KPK Law has triggered pros and cons in the community. President Jokowi also expressed his disapproval of some of the substance of the revision of the Act which has the potential to reduce the effectiveness of the KPK’s duties.
The planned Revision of the KPK Law, which was busy and causing a polemic, was also rejected by Jokowi. Previously, the revision of the KPK Law had caused controversy in the community. Various arguments related to the weakening of the KPK’s performance when the KPK Law Revision was enacted. On the other hand, there is a flood of support that states that the KPK Law is out of date. There are many rules which are considered to clash with other agencies. So the implementation is not optimal.
The enactment of the KPK Law Revision is intended to make this anti-profit organization stronger. The implication is in eradicating corruption in our beloved country, Indonesia. The middle one is busy with regard to the Regulatory Body. The formation of this body is considered not functioning optimally. But on the other hand, the regulatory body will be able to improve the performance of the KPK. Considering that the transfer of supervision is only to the public, so far it has been judged to be irresponsible.
The latest news, Jokowi expressed his disapproval of some of the substance of the KPK Bill. Which bill from the DPR’s initiative seems to be considered to reduce the effectiveness of the KPK’s performance. He also asserted that if the KPK, it must remain a strong, strong institution and supported by related instruments in its duties and actions. Based on this fact it proves that the President has also been working to strengthen efforts to eradicate corruption by the anti-food agency.
Regarding the KPK Law Revision, Jokowi mentioned the 4 points he refused. Among others; His disapproval of the KPK’s decision must ask for an external permit for wiretapping, Jokowi did not agree if the KPK investigators were only from the Police and Prosecutors’ Office, Jokowi also did not agree if the KPK was obliged to coordinate with the Attorney General regarding prosecution, the last disapproval of LKHPN management being transferred. Since LKHPN must still be managed by the KPK itself.
In the first point, Jokowi added that the KPK had enough internal permission from the Supervisory Board to maintain confidentiality. The second point, according to him, investigators and investigators are not only from the KPK, but also from the ASN element. Appointed from KPK employees and other government agencies. However, it still must go through the correct recruitment procedures.
For the third point, Jokowi stated that the prosecution system that has been running so far has been considered good, so it does not need to be changed again. The last point regarding LKHPN, Jokowi emphasized that the management of LKHPN should not be delegated and managed by other ministries or institutions. He asked that the LKHPN continue to be taken care of by the KPK as it has been underway.
Meanwhile, Jokowi emphasized that Law Number 30 Year 2002 concerning the KPK was 17 years old. Therefore, it is necessary to improve in a limited way so that eradication of corruption cases will be more effective. Jokowi also appealed for the existence of the KPK so that its authority is stronger than other institutions concerning rasuah. Jokowi also participated in and studied all the input given by the public, lecturers, anti-corruption activists, and student figures. Which has met him related to the DPR’s proposal to revise the KPK Law.
He also explained, when there was an initiative from the House of Representatives to submit the KPK Bill, the government was tasked with responding, then preparing a List of Problems and assigning ministers to represent the President, in discussions with the Parliament. Jokowi stated that if he had given direction to the Minister of Law and Human Rights and the Minister of PANRB, relating to the delivery of attitudes and views of the government regarding the substances to be revised by the KPK Law, based on the DPR’s initiative.
The main thing is, the KPK as an authorized anti-financial institution must continue to play a central role in this corruption eradication process. Therefore, the KPK must be supported by adequate authority and power. The implication is that the KPK must be stronger than other institutions in the matter of corruption.
Apart from the many polemics and pros and cons related to the revision of the KPK Law, let us give full authority to the government and the Parliament to optimize their role in developing the country. This does not mean guaranteeing everything that happens, but still waiting for a decision and monitoring the best results for the common good. The connection with the eradication of corruption is considered as the root of all problems in the country.
)* The author is a social political observer