Deputy chairman of the inquiry committee into the Corruption Eradication Commission Risa Mariska (second left), inquiry committee members Eddy Kusuma Wijaya (left), Masinton Pasaribu (third left) and Mukhammad Misbhakun leave the venue of a closed meeting at the House of Representatives in Senayan, Jakarta, Monday (3/7). The inquiry committee has announced that it will meet with the Supreme Audit Agency , the police and graft convicts held in the Pondok Bambu Penitentiary and the Sukamiskin Penitentiary to uncover violations allegedly committed by the commission.
JAKARTA, KOMPAS — The House of Representatives (DPR) inquiry committee on the Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK) continues its efforts in trying to uncover wrongdoings carried out by the national anticorruption agency, as is seen in the committee’s plan to meet with several graft convicts who felt they had been unfairly treated by the KPK.
Through its visit to Sukamiskin penitentiary in Bandung and Pondok Bambu penitentiary in East Jakarta, scheduled for Thursday (6/7), the inquiry committee said it hoped to collect data on potential human rights abuses conducted by KPK investigators in the course of their investigations.
Ahead of the two prison visits, the inquiry committee will meet Supreme Audit Agency chairman Harry Azhar Azis and several agency members to discuss a BPK audit report on the KPK’s performance in 2015.
Amid the scheduled activity, House deputy speaker Fahri Hamzah, one of the proponents of the right of inquiry motion, said on Monday (3/7) that the existence of supporting state institutions such as the KPK should be reviewed.
Unwarranted
Criminal law lecturer Agustinus Pohan at Bandung’s Parahyangan University said ongoing events had confirmed public opinion that political parties, through the inquiry committee, were attempting to find mistakes made by the KPK. The attempt was retaliation for the many politicians who were prosecuted by the KPK for corruption. “The fight against corruption is facing white-collar criminals who are making an attempt at retaliation,” he said.
The House inquiry committee’s plan to visit the two prisons, according to Agustinus, was unwarranted. Procedural provisions existed for the public if the KPK had committed a violation during its investigations, either through a pretrial motion or by reporting to the National Commission on Human Rights (Komnas HAM).
The committee’s intention to visit several graft convicts had emerged because of complaints and reports that KPK investigators had treated witnesses and suspects unfairly, said Risa Mariska, deputy chairperson of the inquiry committee from the PDI-P faction.
“We want to gather information on what they felt as witnesses, suspects and corruption convicts,” Risa said.
The inquiry committee, she said, planned to meet all corruption convicts incarcerated by the KPK at Sukamiskin and Pondok Bambu prisons. Details on the corruption convicts were pending a letter from the Law and Human Rights Ministry’s directorate general of correctional facilities.
“We will invite them all to a big hall. We will not meet them one by one, so that we are not suspected of doing this at the request of certain parties,” said committee member Misbakhun of the Golkar Party faction.
After the prison visit, the committee also planned to visit Komnas HAM.
The head of public relations at the correctional facilities directorate general, Syarpani, said his office had not yet received a letter of request from the House regarding its plan to visit Sukamiskin and Pondok Bambu penitentiaries. He said the activity required an official permit, which was usually initiated by a formal letter.
Based on smslap.ditjenpas.go.id, as of May 2017 there are 408 graft convicts at Sukamiskin and 7 graft convicts at Pondok Bambu.
KPK spokesman Febri Diansyah welcomed the House inquiry committee’s plan to visit Sukamiskin and Pondok Bambu penitentiaries. However, he reminded the lawmakers that the convicts at the two prisons had been legally and convincingly found guilty of corruption. In fact, most of their cases had reached the level of appeal, meaning that there were no issues to be pursued, including the investigation process asa part of case management.
