Sentence Reduction Sends a Negative Signal

Sentences for corruption convicts have once again been reduced in a judicial review decision at the Supreme Court. It is feared that this could weaken the deterrent effect against corruption

KOMPAS/RADITYA HELABUMI

Inactive Riau governor Nurdin Basirun attends a follow-up trial hearing in a bribery case at the Jakarta Corruption Court on Wednesday (11/12/2019). The governor has been named a suspect by the Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK) over allegations that Nurdin had accepted bribes and unlawful gifts valued at Rp 4.22 billion (US$302,010) during deliberations of the province’s zoning plan on coastal areas and small islands.

JAKARTA, KOMPAS — The trend of cutting sentences for corruption convicts by the Supreme Court over the past few months is feared to be a negative sign in efforts to eradicate corruption. The Supreme Court is expected to remain highly committed to preventing the weakening of the deterrent effect against corrupt behavior.

On the other hand, the phenomenon also needs to be addressed by the Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK) by evaluating the inquiry and investigation of corruption cases that they have carried out.

Since early 2019, the Supreme Court has reduced the sentences of nine corruption convicts through a judicial review decision.

In line with the sentence reductions, there has also been an increase in judicial review requests. Data from the Central Jakarta District Court shows that as of early November there have been 38 judicial review requests from corruption convicts. Previously, when Chief Justice Artidjo Alkostar was still active, for example, in 2017 and 2016, there were around 17 judicial review requests for corruption cases (Kompas, 13/6/2018). Artidjo, who is known to often impose harsh sentences on corruption convicts, retired on May 22, 2018.

Since early 2019, the Supreme Court has reduced the sentences of nine corruption convicts through a judicial review decision.

Judicial review decision

A sentence reduction through judicial review was most recently given to the former regent of Buton, Southeast Sulawesi, Samsu Umar Abdul Samiun. On Dec. 12, Samsu received a reduced criminal sentence to three years in prison from the Supreme Court. Previously, the Jakarta Corruption Court in September 2017 sentenced him to imprisonment for 3 years and 9 months and a fine of Rp 150 million or an additional confinement period of three months. He was found guilty of bribing former Constitutional Court chief justice Akil Mochtar Rp 1 billion in connection with the regional election dispute suit.

Supreme Court spokesman Andi Samsan Nganro when contacted in Jakarta, Friday (13/12/2019), said the judicial review decision on Samsu was taken by a panel of judges presided over by Suhadi with Eddy Army and Mohammad Askin as members. This decision was made based on a perceived mistake by the judges, or a real mistake as regulated in Article 263 Paragraph (2) Letter c of the Criminal Procedure Code.

"The reason is, among other things, the judicial review applicant committed an act judged against the law because there was an influence from other people who tricked him into transferring money. About two years later, he only found out that it was Akil Mochtar\'s account. Therefore, the judicial review application has reason to be granted," said Andi.

KOMPAS/FERGANATA INDRA RIATMOKO

A student watches a theatrical piece titled “Trap Mice with Ties” conducted by artist Rasyidin Wig Maroe at SD 4 Mojosongo state elementary school, Surakarta, Central Java, on Monday (9/12/2019). The activity, which was held to mark World Anti-Corruption Day, was used as a means to instill an anticorruption spirit in children from an early age.

Andi refused the assumption that the Supreme Court was not committed to efforts to eradicate corruption. According to him, the decision that led to the reduction of the sentence was still based on the evidence and the reasons from the applicant.

In connection with the trend of reducing the sentences of corruption convicts, former Supreme Court judge Artidjo said the Supreme Court\'s judicial review decision was dependent on the perspective and application of the article made by the judge when handling a case. The difference in the application of the articles can make the sentences being handed down differ between the court of the first stage, appeal, to cassation, even the judicial review. Each case also has a weight and characteristics that are not uniform so that it affects the judge\'s judgment which ends up burdening, strengthening and alleviating.

Likewise, when he ruled on the case. The conviction that was often burdensome from Artidjo was still based on the application of articles and rules of law.

Negative signal

KPK spokesman Febri Diansyah said the KPK respected the verdict handed down by the Supreme Court. However, the KPK also hopes that the vision, mission and perceptions of each institution, including the Supreme Court, which is the last line of the legal process, are not different in efforts to eradicate corruption. Therefore, the eradication of corruption needs to be done together and simultaneously.

Don\'t ever let corruption become a new normal.

A lecturer of Jentera Law School, Bivitri Susanti, said the formula to fight against corruption would be effective if it was carried out by all institutions. For example, the Supreme Court has a similar view, the President also does not grant clemency for corruption convicts, nor does the House of Representatives (DPR) weaken corruption eradication through laws.

"Don\'t ever let corruption become a new normal. Ah, no problem with corruption, anyway, its penalty will be reduced. Later people will no longer be afraid of corruption," said Bivitri.

One of the KPK\'s elected leaders for the 2019-2023 period, Lili Pintauli Siregar, said the KPK could not evaluate the Supreme Court\'s decision. However, after being inaugurated, she will evaluate the internal performance of the KPK, especially at the start of the investigation of a case. Because, in the legal process, the verdicts on cases handled by the KPK are often under prosecutors\' demands, and even the Supreme Court has reduced the sentences of corruption convicts several times.