Saut Situmorang, deputy chairman of the Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK), shows off detention cells for those involved in corruption cases to journalists during a tour of the new KPK building on Sunday (19/2). The KPK has moved most of its operations to the new building on Jl. HR Rasuna Said.
Judges handing down verdicts that revoke the political rights of corruption convicts is becoming a trend. Most recently, Irman Gusman, former chair of the Regional Representatives Council, was politically disenfranchised by judges.
Irman was found guilty of accepting a Rp 100 million bribe from Memi and Xaveriandy Sutanto. Aside from Irman’s principal sentence of four years and six months in prison, the panel of judges issued an additional sentence revoking his political right for three years after undertaking the principal sentence. The political right in question is the right to be elected to public office.
The Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK) is actively introducing political disenfranchisement. The political rights of a number of figures and institution leaders such as former Constitutional Court chief justice Akil Mochtar, former Prosperous Justice Party (PKS) president Luthfi Hasan Ishaaq, former Democrat Party general chair Anas Urbaningrum and former Banten governor Atut Chosiyah have been revoked. We support this political disenfranchisement so that public positions are held by people who are truly free of corruption.
However, the sociological reality of people in a number of places still being permissive of corruption should be realized. The victories of regional heads who are suspects or who have been arrested by the KPK show community acceptance of bribery and corruption. For pragmatic political reasons, corrupters and bribers are not a problem. Therefore, the step taken by the KPK and the judges, who continue implementing this additional sentence revoking political right, needs to be supported.
Like a war, corruption that impoverishes the nation is a war that we have not yet been able to win. However, contemporary sociological reality also demonstrates that the fight against corruption is not as huge as the defense of other power-related issues. Corruption is fought if it is carried out by someone else\'s group or faction. Conversely, if the corruptor who has been caught is from someone’s own group, the reaction is selective handling, trapping or even conspiracy.
Psychological community reaction like this certainly does not help the nation to fight against corruption. Therefore, progressive legal enforcement is needed to make corruption verdicts a deterrent, making people think a thousand times before carrying out corruption.
Aside from the revocation of political rights, population registration should also mention corruption, for example, in the data of former corrupters or former corruption convicts. This additional sentence could spark controversy because it violates human rights. However, a breakthrough is necessary so that this nation can climb out of the ditch of prolonged corruption.
