JAKARTA, KOMPAS — The House of Representatives’ Inquiry Committee seems to be trying persistently to find the faults of the Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK). This is evidenced in its intention to question the institutional posture of the anti-graft agency. Such a fact confirms the allegation that a political motive is behind the use of the right to inquiry.
The institution of the KPK is not part of the objectives that formed the House’s use of the right of inquiry. Based on the official document on the right to inquiry, the objective of the House Inquiry Committee is the investigation into a House member from the Hanura Party, Miryam S Haryani, by the KPK; the alleged irregularities in the KPK’s budget spending according to the Supreme Audit Agency (BPK), and indications that documents on corruption case investigations were leaked by the KPK.
“The material that has become the basis for the use of right to inquiry is fundamentally incorrect, and has now been expanded to include questioning the institution of the KPK. The inquiry team keeps trying to find weaknesses in the KPK,” said constitutional law lecturer Asep Warlan Yusuf of Bandung-based Parahyangan University, when contacted from Jakarta on Sunday (11/6).
The intent to question the position of the KPK in the state and criminal court systems was conveyed by Inquiry Committee chairman Agun Gunandjar Sudarsa of the Golkar Party faction last Thursday.
“This KPK, for example, in the context of the branches state power, how is it positioned? Is it executive, legislative or judiciary? Then, in the criminal court system, where is it positioned? The KPK should be a trigger for the police and the judiciary to improve their performance. But, what is happening is like ‘the house gecko (cicak) and the crocodile’, they’re fighting over cases,” he said.
Even though the institutional issue is not mentioned in the official document of the House’s right on the KPK, Agun denied that the issue was not included in the inquiry’s substance.
Not a function of inquiry
Asep said it was wrong if the House Inquiry Committee questioned the KPK as an institution. That was not the function of the right to inquiry.
According to Law No.17/2014 on MPR, DPR, DPD and DPRD, the House can exercise its right to inquiry to investigate policies allegedly violating the law. Moreover, the policies should be those of the government, not from a law enforcement agency like the KPK.
Fellow constitutional law observer Irmanputra Sidin also conveyed a similar view. “Questioning the institutional posture of the KPK is not the domain of an investigation functioning under the right to inquiry. That is academic,” he said.
The existence of new material aside from those that were the original basis for investigation under the right to inquiry shows this is outsidethe legal path. “In a state of law, a new agenda cannot suddenly appear midway,” Irman said.
The existence of new material, Irman added, only strengthened there being a hidden political motive behind the inquiry. That motive is suspected to be an attempt to delegitimize the KPK.
Trisakti University law lecturer Abdul Fickar Hadjar said corruption eradication was one of President Joko Widodo administration’s priority programs. In this regard, if the President allows the KPK to be delegitimized, it would mean that the President ignores his own programs.
“The President’s assertion on the side of the KPK is needed,” said Muhammadiyah youth wing chairman Dahnil Anzar Siman- juntak.