By: Iman Sjahputra  SH.,SpN.,,LLM*)

The case of Chandra and Bibit Waluyo, the Vice Chairman of KPK (Corruption Eradication Commission) that has took our attention for nearly 3 (three) months now is over. Both the KPK high ranking officials previously accused for having received bribery now is officially get their original positions as the Vice Chairman of KPK. The community finally is released and satisfied because we can still find “justice” in our country and ”law” is still above on everything. However the return of Chandra and Bibit in their previous position in KPK has not yet cleared all the recent existing legal problems. One to be mentioned is about the “interception” that has been done by the KPK. Legally it is questionable whether or not the interception done by KPK can be justified? Then how far is the entitlement of KPK to conduct the interception? These questions are arisen because the communities’ apprehensive, especially the law enforcers, that power of KPK as a super body in conducting the interception and recording the conversations of somebody which is permitted by Article 12 of the Corruption Eradication Commission law year 2002 can excess its authority. As the consequences our private rights can be violated. Now the government is still drafting the Draft of the Government Regulation on the Procedures of Interception which is drafted by the Department of Communication and Information (Depkominfo) and led by Tifatul Sembiring, further it has become the agenda of Tifatul that such Government Regulation on the Procedures of Interception will be finished at the latest on April 2010 in accordance with Article 54 of the Information and Electronic Transaction Law. For this time being, there is a debating whether it is necessary or not to obtain a permit for conducting an interception. The Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK) through one of its Vice Chairman, M. Yasin, has refused the Draft of the Government Regulation on the Procedures of Interception, especially on the regulation on obtaining a permit from a certain body to conduct the interception in handling a legal case. KPK’s argument is that when the condition is good and the integrity of the officials in this country is in control then the requirement to obtain a permit prior conducting an interception is a must, however in case the integrity of the officials is still being questioned then it could affect the effectiveness in eradicating the corruption. But M.Yassin agrees that it is necessary to conduct an audit on each interception taken and there shall be a tight internal supervision and can be justified to the public when it is necessary. We have to admit that some corruption cases are uncovered because of the interception and recording. The cases involving the members or officials at DPR, the Forestry instance; sea instance; education department until the head of the regent and others can be summoning to the court due to the existence of the up to date equipments owned by KPK, so that the accused officials cannot deny their involvement when the case hear before the court. The accusation brought by KPK against the accused was proven before the Court therefore all of them can be prosecuted. As an institution, KPK is surely a strong body and the authorities empowers by the law to KPK is also a wide reaching. This institution is not equipped with the competence to cease a case in case of such person has became the accused, just like the slogan move forward and no retreating. The rights empowered to KPK make all the accused for corruption cases is very scaring, moreover the KPK institution is regarded as cannot be bribed. Therefore all the cases which have been examined, investigated and being prosecuted by KPK resulted with the judge decision to “punish” and there is no compromise to be released or freed from the prosecutions. This phenomenon is indeed making the law enforcers looks like a graft busters for the corruptor so they could be easily targeted by the KPK anytime they involved in bribery and corruption. They said there are many ways have been taken to weaken or dispersed this super body. Recently it is suspected that the arising the case whereas Chandra and Bibit has become the victims. Part of our communities surely hopes that this case will not be repeated. The Institution of KPK shall exist and has the integrity. The interference of anyone trying to reduce the capacities of KPK shall be regarded as a betrayal toward the law and justice. However it is not yet finalized whether or not the KPK’s power in intercepting and recording has to be further regulated such as to obtain a permit from the court as it is applied in a developed country such as U.S.A. This issued shall be considered thoroughly. A court permit may take time and long procedures and further the integrity of the court is also questionable. Furthermore the KPK existence is aimed to give a shock therapy in investigating/wiping out the corruption cases that widely spread within each layer of the societies and it has made people very sick. Does the recording transcript case of Anggodo’s conversation which had become the Indonesian people center of attention have shattered the hearts of each Indonesian people to see the game of the law enforcers therefore they need to regulate KPK authorities in intercepting and recording. If it is the purpose then our answer is no because KPK institution has a noble destination which is eradicating the corruption. This is what the Indonesian people longing for so that one day Indonesia has a clean and respected government administration. Do we agree?

*) Writer is a lawyer and domiciled in Jakarta