Heru Andriyanto – Graft suspects might prefer to have their cases prosecuted by the Attorney General's Office, where there is always a good chance their cases will be dropped, activists say. On the other hand, the Corruption Eradication Commission has never failed to send its accused to prison.
Consider the cases of three former Bangkok Embassy officials. The AGO revealed on Friday that it was considering dropping the embezzlement charges against the three, not because of a lack of evidence, but "primarily because the money has been returned," Deputy Attorney General for Special Crimes Marwan Effendy said.
He added that it had originally been used in the "interests of the state," but was later forced to acknowledge that some of the money was used for personal gain by the suspects.
Those excuses ignore suggestion from state auditors that state losses were incurred and an article in the anti-corruption law that clearly states returning stolen state assets doesn't wipe out a crime.
The case is the latest example of what anti-corruption activists call a practice of cherry-picking that continues to earn the AGO notoriety.
The AGO's plan immediately drew strong opposition from Indonesia Corruption Watch, which said it would be "more than happy to mail the anti-corruption law book to the deputy if he doesn't have one." Now ICW has officially asked the anti-graft commission, known as the KPK, to take over the embassy case.
"Part of the embassy budget had been used to play golf, pay personal expenses and buy souvenirs. Can we say these things are in the interest of the state?" said Emerson Yuntho, deputy head of ICW.
According to an audit by the Development Finance Comptroller (BPKP), the state suffered losses of more than $160,000 as a result of the embezzlement from the embassy in Thailand.
The Jan. 14 audit document, a copy of which was obtained by the Jakarta Globe, details how Ambassador Muhammad Hatta and two embassy staffers collected "tactical funds" to finance non-budgetary spending.
The report said the methods to raise the money included collecting fake receipts from local travel agencies to claim official trips; taking fees from companies who won embassy maintenance and renovation projects; and inflating the allowances of embassy staff and teachers.
"These funds were not put in the state coffers. Instead they were spent on the personal needs of the ambassador and on other expenses either consented to or instructed by the ambassador," the document says. It enclosed a spending list that also included 75,000 baht ($2,271) on golf days and 100,000 baht on "souvenirs for Jakarta."
Nevertheless, Marwan said such expenses, including the golf, were used to entertain the embassy's diplomatic guests because the official budget didn't cover them. "The money was used in the interests of the state," he said.
Such explanations are earning the AGO a reputation as prone to dropping cases against the wealthy and well-connected.
When asked in 2008 why the graft case relating to a 1988 fraudulent oil refinery project against former Energy Minister Ginandjar Kartasasmita was dropped, Marwan replied that the case had expired according to the law and had to be halted.
He referred to the criminal procedures code stating that a corruption case punishable by a life sentence had to be prosecuted within 18 years, or be dropped. However, the records showed that the AGO first charged and Ginandjar in 2001 and dropped the charges in 2004.
Last August, the AGO freed Hutomo "Tommy" Mandala Putra, the youngest son of the late former president Suharto, on corruption charges related to monopoly practices and unfair state subsidies in the clove industry because the suspect had supposedly repaid all state debts.
In a similar move favoring former state enterprise minister Laksamana Sukardi, the AGO said last year it was unable to prove that state losses were incurred in the secret sale of two large tanker ships belonging to state-run oil firm PT Pertamina because there was no firm benchmark to judge whether the tankers were sold below the market price. The case against Laksamana was dropped.
Not so fortunate were suspects prosecuted by KPK, who, after becoming an active player in the country's fight against graft in early 2004, has never failed to convict a suspects, with the exception of one who died during his trial and another who was freed for insanity.
Unlike the KPK, the AGO has the authority to drop a graft case midway into an investigation.
"When the KPK successfully uncovered graft cases at embassies in Malaysia and Singapore, the AGO was under pressure to get into the same game by initiating probes in Beijing and Bangkok. But while the KPK has put former envoys behind bars, what progress has the AGO made in their embassy cases?" said Boyamin Saiman, chairman of the Indonesian Anti-Corruption Society (Maki).
"The KPK must take over the Bangkok case. As for the AGO, it doesn't surprise me that they plan not to proceed with the Bangkok case because when it comes to political power and money, prosecutors become very soft," he said.
"Remember when the AGO prosecuted the corruption case at [state postal firm] PT Pos Indonesia? Because its former executives only had small bank accounts, they were detained immediately," he said.