For the Regional Governance Hub Video Conference Learning About Anti-Corruption Agencies in East Asia Jakarta 18 June 2010 The Main Function and Duty of KPK and the Challenges Faced and the Challenges Faced By Chandra M. Hamzah (KPK Commisioner) (KPK Commisioner)

KPK’s Vision and Mission Vision: To be an institution that can create an Indonesia free from corruption Mission: To become the catalyst of change to realize a corruption free nation To be the leader and the driver of change in the creation of an anti- corruption nation Principles: Legal certainty, transparency, accountability, public interest, proportionality Values: Integrity, professionalism, innovation, religiosity, transparency, leadership, productivity

Duties of KPK (Article 6)‏ The KPK's Duties (Article 6 Law No.30 year 2002)‏ Monitoring (Article 14)‏ Prevention (Article 13)‏ Pre-investigation, Investigation & Prosecution (Article 11)‏ Supervision (Article 8)‏ Coordination (Article 7)‏

4 KPK’s Anti-Corruption Mechanism (Law no 30/2002)‏ Mandates Article 6 To coordinate Article 7 To supervise Article 8 To pre-investigate, to investigate, to prosecute Article 11 To prevent Article 13 To review systems Article 14 1.Attorney General 2.Police 3.Supreme Audit 4.All Inspectorate Generals 5.others 1.Attorney General 2.Police 3.Supreme Audit 4.All Inspectorate Generals 5.Others 1.Agencies which render public services 1.All powers granted to other LEA by the Law of Procedures 2. Certain powers which are not granted to other LEA

Challenges Ahead

Corruption Fights Back In Law Enforcement: ◦ Through bribery: Slow progress in bureaucracy reform in the Police, AGO and Judiciary has allowed offers and solicitation of bribes to continue; ◦ Through Politics: The over-politicization of anti-corruption efforts constitute a major challenge for law enforcers. In Day to Day Business: ◦ Through complex business agreements: for example, white collar criminals make use of legitimate financial and contractual instruments to move stolen assets off-shore; ◦ Through the lack of cooperation between private and public sectors: corruption is still very common where public and private activities intersect, but there is no legislation regulating private sectors corruption.

Corruption Fights Back (1) The Anti-corruption Agency or “Paran” (Panitia Retooling Aparatur Negara) which obligates all state officers to submit wealth reports was failed because state officers were resistant reluctant to fulfill their obligations toward “Paran” New agency by Presidential Decree no. 275/1963 so called “Operasi Budhi” was also unsuccessful because of the bureaucracy officers and state officers who are close to the President A new anti-corruption agency called “TPK (Tim Pemberantasan Korupsi)” was established in the beginning of President Soeharto era. This agency was barren “Komite Empat” (Four Commission) formed in the beginning of the 70s as a response to students protest did not really perform “Tim Gabungan Pemberantasan Tindak Pidana Korupsi-TGPTPK” (Anti- Corruption Joint Team) established in the era of President Abdurrahman Wahid, finally was dismissed by the Supreme Court. According to the Supreme Court (by means of judicial review), the existence and structure of the agency was not common

In year 2007, corruptors fight back took place in different forms. The attacks towards anti-corruption activities were done through various methods and channels. The courts have not been giving much supports to anti- corruption efforts. Many corruptors are freed by the verdict. Low commitment of the Parliament. During the year 2007, there were indication of the weakening efforts toward many state agencies including the KPK. Some issues related to corruption eradication have not been regulated. Corruption Fights Back (2)

Some issues related to corruption eradication have not been regulated: Witness protection Lawful interception Wealth report Private to private sector corruption Corruption Fights Back (3)

Difficulties in Bureaucracy and Judiciary Reform: –Too much focus on remunerative aspects: Not enough effort in defining and seriously implementing performance management functions; Not enough effort in changing rules on the recruitment, remuneration and termination of public servants in the interest of making savings in the State Budget; –Scale of reforms is immense: There is a need to maintain the slow and piece-meal pace of progress, so that positive changes survive leadership transitions; The State Budget cannot support the weight of unqualified remuneration across the nation, especially in the wake of Indonesia's recent and very significant decentralization of power to local governments; Slow Pace of Reforms

Measures Taken Comprehensive approach to harmonize preventive and repressive activities Triggering national bureaucratic reform Shifting mindset and culture of the people and zero tolerance to corruption Building public trust and supports