Dicky Christanto, Jakarta – Following the House approval of the 2009 Corruption Court Law, the Corruption Eradication Commission may have to surrender its authority to prosecute to the AGO, despite NGO's and activist's claims that competition between the two institutions would improve prosecution in graft trials.
Under the new law it is unclear whether the Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK) or the Attorney General's Office (AGO) should handle prosecutions in graft cases the KPK investigates.
Currently, the KPK has its own team of prosecutors, but the AGO, which apparently regards itself as the only state body that should have the power to prosecute, has insisted that the commission stop at the investigation stage and then surrender its cases to the AGO.
On Thursday, KPK leaders met with Attorney General Hendarman Supandji to discuss the issue, with the likely result that both institutions will retain authority to prosecute.
Newly installed KPK interim chief Tumpak Hatorangan Panggabean said his office was discussing the prosecution authority model as required by the newly passed law.
Tumpak said the discussion would help prosecutors from both offices clarify their respective responsibilities. "We need to coordinate with the AGO first, to anticipate the new graft court law," he said.
However, Tumpak refused to reveal details of the discussion to journalists, saying it was still under discussion.
On Thursday, a number of anti-graft activists said rivalry between the commission and the AGO in graft prosecution would improve the eradication of graft.
"Prosecutors from the KPK and the AGO will be forced to perform their best under the new law, otherwise they will be quickly spotted by the public as incompetent," Transparency International Indonesia secretary-general Teten Masduki told The Jakarta Post on Thursday.
The KPK's prosecutors had shown zero tolerance toward graft perpetrators, by handing down hefty punishments, Teten said.
According to the KPK law, KPK prosecutors are not allowed to drop graft cases once prosecution has been initiated. "Apparently the public feel that the KPK would investigate cases more thoroughly than the AGO because the KPK law doesn't allow them to halt investigations," Teten said.
Graft cases handled by the KPK have all reached court, and all defendants have been punished, Teten said.
Conversely, the AGO has long been criticized for letting most corruptors evade justice by stopping investigations and interfering in prosecution, or for being lazy in preparing evidence for trials.
Teten said the KPK's excellent track record of graft prosecution would push AGO prosecutors to do better.
Several graft activists have long voiced the need for an amendment to the AGO law, in hopes the law would not allow prosecutors to halt investigations into corruption cases. By doing so, they argue, prosecutors would be more serious in preparing evidence and indictments during corruption case trials.
Legal expert Chaerul Huda of Muhammadiyah University in Jakarta agreed with Teten, saying the competition would force prosecutors to develop a more effective prosecuting model in corruption trials.