Indonesia Gets Points for Trying On Corruption (Softskill Bahasa Inggris)

Indonesia Gets Points for Trying On Corruption

Indonesia may score high marks for its legal framework for combating corruption, but it loses something in the execution, according to a study released in Washington on Friday.

In a study that looked at governance and anticorruption mechanisms in 31 countries, Washington-based group Global Integrity put Indonesia’s overall score at a respectable 81 out of 100.

At 95, the country’s legal framework is considered “very strong” — but in terms of implementation, it rated a relatively “weak” 69.

The group noted that in practice, judicial decisions were sometimes not enforced by the state and citizens often did not have equal access to the justice system.

“In general, there is a lack of trust of among the general public about judicial fairness in Indonesia, especially among disadvantaged citizens,” the report says.

The “small people or disadvantaged citizens,” it adds, often receive the maximum sentence, while “big people or people with money and power” receive the minimal sentence, and sometimes their charges are downgraded.

Global Integrity says Indonesian law enforcers have sufficient funding to fulfil their mandate, which includes combating graft, but notes that they are also susceptible to political interference.

By law, citizens are entitled to lodge complaints about infractions by law enforcers, but not all reports result in action being taken, the report says.

Between January and September 2010, the National Police Commission received 928 complaints regarding police behavior. Only 465 were resolved.

In 2009, 429 police personnel were fired for involvement in criminal activity, lack of discipline or violations of the police code. In 2010, 272 police officers were fired for similar reasons and 88 between January and July 2011.

But Indonesia scores fairly well in terms of reporting on corruption in the media — 78 out of 100 — while antigraft groups in the country appear to be fairly effective in that role with a rating of 81.

Despite this, activists and journalists still often face intimidation and threats for exposing corruption cases.

The report highlights an attack against Indonesia Corruption Watch activist Tama Satrya Langkun in July 2010 and many cases in which journalists were killed, attacked, threatened or imprisoned for reporting on corruption scandals in 2010 and 2011.

In December, a mob stoned and burned down the home of Dance Henukh, a reporter with the Rote Ndao News tabloid in East Nusa Tenggara, killing his newborn daughter.

Prior to the incident, Dance had written about corruption allegations surrounding the construction of 100 houses for transmigrant workers in Kuli village.

Global Integrity examined developed countries such as the United States, Ireland and Germany for the report as well as dozens of the world’s emerging markets and developing nations, from Algeria to Ukraine to China.

Rather than measure perceptions of corruption, the report uses 320 “Integrity Indicators” to assess the accountability mechanisms and transparency measures in place to prevent corruption — or lack thereof.

“The country assessments that comprise the report offer among the most detailed, evidence-based evaluations of anti-corruption mechanisms available anywhere in the world,” said Global Integrity’s executive director, Nathaniel Heller.

“They provide policy makers, activists and citizens alike with the information to understand the governance challenges unique to each country and to take action.”