Jakarta – Observers of the country's judicial system have suggested a one-roof process under the Anticorruption Court, viewing the current system as failing in the prosecution of corruption cases.
Professional Civil Society chief Ismet Hassan Putro says the court system has failed to manage corruption cases, as seen in the exoneration of ICW Neloe and other suspects in the recent Bank Mandiri corruption trial at the South Jakarta District Court. The verdict drew harsh criticism about the lack of commitment of judges and prosecutors to fighting corruption.
Ismet agreed with the suggestion of the Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK) last week that corruption cases, either from the KPK or the Attorney General's Office (AGO), should be tried in the Anticorruption Court.
Under current law, the Anticorruption Court is only authorized to try cases from the KPK, while cases from the AGO go to other courts.
Separately, Indonesian Corruption Watch chief Teten Masduki said he agreed with the expansion of the Anticorruption Court's authority.
"The Anticorruption Court should not only try cases from the Corruption Eradication Commission, but also cases from the AGO," he said, adding that the other courts still could not be trusted.
He said many defendants in corruption cases tried in the court system were released, and that of the 47 corruption cases handled in courts other than the Anticorruption Court, half had resulted in sentences of under two years. "In the Anticorruption Court, the sentences can be up to life," he said.
The Anticorruption Court, with no defendants so far having escaped punishment, is seen as firmer in trying corruption cases than the other courts. A defendant appealing his sentence also faces the strong possibility of it being increased instead of dismissed.
Ismet said defendants tried in regular courts often escaped prison, not just because of the judges who presented the verdicts, but also because of weak charges from prosecutors.
He also pointed out that the AGO was lacking in human resources. He noted that the best prosecutors had been transferred to the KPK, leaving the AGO with prosecutors who lacked knowledge, especially in banking matters.
"Most prosecutors do not have banking in their academic background. Then they must face bankers who know the banking world inside out. They don't have a chance," he said.
Indonesian Corruption Watch chief Teten Masduki disagreed with Ismet, saying there were still many good prosecutors in the country, but added that prosecutors should seek out the assistance of experts in financial and banking matters when dealing with corruption cases such as Bank Mandiri.
Commenting on the criticism, AGO spokesman Masyhudi said prosecutors did seek expert advice when trying cases. "We ask the Supreme Audit Agency or banking experts for their opinions."
Masyhudi had no objections to the one-roof process suggestion, saying it would be a good idea, but that it depended on the government and the legislature to provide the necessary regulations.
Ismet also called for the government to make legislation that would allow corruption cases from the AGO to be tried in the Anticorruption Court.