Public Has Final Say in KPK Leadership Selection

KOMPAS/WAWAN H PRABOWO

The Selection Committee for Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK) ladership candidates through chairwoman Yenti Garnasih (center) announces the names of who passed the profile assessment test at the State Secretariat Ministry building, Jakarta, Friday (23/8/2019). The KPK committee disclosed 20 names that passed the profile assessment stage from various occupations ranging from police officers, prosecutors, lawyers, KPK employees and commissioners, to lecturers, judges, state-owned enterprise employees and civil servants. After this, the 20 KPK candidates will undergo a medical assessment on August 26 at the Gatot Subroto Army Hospital.

JAKARTA, KOMPAS — The public must have the final say in the selection process of the 2019-2023 period of the Corruption Eradication Commission’s (KPK) leadership. The public must observe the 20 names that recently passed the KPK leadership selection committee’s profile assessment. They must provide valuable inputs and suggestions regarding the 20 figures to either the KPK or the selection committee.

Gadjah Mada University’s (UGM) Corruption Studies Center’s (PUKAT) Oce Madrid said that the public should examine the 20 names as the selection committee was not responsive enough toward the KPK’s investigation process.

Among the 20 names, there are three police personnel, three prosecutors and a retired prosecutor. Of the incumbent KPK commissioners, only Alexander Marwata passed the profile assessment process. Another commissioner, Laode M Syarif, did not pass the assessment.

A KPK employee is also among the 20 names. Among the 10 other candidates, there is one judge, one lawyer, three civil servants, three lecturers, one state-owned enterprise employee and one ministerial advisor.

Based on its investigation, the KPK has said that some candidates were problematic. Some did not submit their wealth reports (LHKPN) on certain periods of time and others received gratuities or committed conduct that hindered the KPK’s work. One violated the code of ethics while working at the KPK.

Therefore, the KPK leadership candidate selection committee must be encouraged to listen to the public. On the other hand, the public must be pushed to provide input and relevant data (Kompas, 24/8/2019).

“The KPK’s investigation results are serious and should be important inputs. We also need to ask why the selection committee was insistent in announcing the names, despite the special notes from the KPK,” Oce said.

According to him, it is fair for the public to question the selection committee’s work and say that they lack transparency and accountability. Choosing persons with poor track records will only mar the committee’s reputation.

Furthermore, the President’s reputation may also be tarnished. “Right now, what we can do is observe the names. People can file reports to the selection committee regarding findings about the names. They can also file reports to the KPK,” Oce said.

Test for the government

Separately, Tebuireng Islamic Boarding School leader Salahuddin Wahid said that the people were hoping that President Joko Widodo would properly respond to public complaints on the names. The President’s and the government’s credibility and anticorruption commitments will be tested through the selection committee’s work.

“There are some problematic names but the selection committee remains unresponsive and insistent on approving them. This brings huge questions. We hope the President will respond properly. He should not listen only to the selection committee. He must also listen to complaints if he wishes to save the KPK,” Salahuddin said.

According to him, the selection committee should protect the President’s credibility by proposing names without problems to the House of Representatives.

Former chairman of Indonesia’s second largest Muslim mass organization Muhammadiyah, Ahmad Syafii Maarif, said that the KPK’s leadership should be filled with persons with proven track records in integrity and independence. “The KPK has extraordinary powers. We don’t want it to fall into the wrong hands,” Syafii said.

KPK spokesman Febri Diansyah said that the commission had submitted the candidates’ track records to the selection committee, as per its request, to help the selection process. The KPK is fully responsible for the methods it uses in the due diligence process. “We have submitted the names and their records to the selection committee. If the committee wishes to dig deeper [into the candidates’ background], the KPK can prepare more,” Febri said.

In response, selection committee member Hendardi said that the KPK’s due diligence report was not legally binding. “[The report] can be an indication that can be investigated deeper in the next stage of the selection,” he said.

House Commission III member from the Indonesian Democratic Party of Struggle (PDIP) faction, Masinton Pasaribu, said that the House opened access for public reports and inputs on the candidates’ track record to be used as consideration during the candidates’ fit and proper test at the House. “If the candidates cannot openly clarify the public reports and inputs, most likely Commission III will not approve them,” he said. (IAN/AGE/NTA/REK)