VZCZCXRO7247
OO RUEHDT RUEHPB
DE RUEHJA #1313/01 2191013
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
O 071013Z AUG 09
FM AMEMBASSY JAKARTA
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC IMMEDIATE 3018
INFO RUCNARF/ASEAN REGIONAL FORUM COLLECTIVE PRIORITY
RUEAWJB/DEPT OF JUSTICE WASHDC
RHMCSUU/FBI WASHINGTON DC
RHEHNSC/NSC WASHDC
RUEHLMC/MILLENNIUM CHALLENGE CORP 0137

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 02 JAKARTA 001313 
 
SENSITIVE 
SIPDIS 
 
DEPT FOR EAP, EAP/MTS, EAP/MLS, EAP/RSP, E, INL 
DOJ FOR CRIM AAG SWARTZ, DOJ/OPDAT FOR BERMAN 
NSC FOR J.BADER; MCC FOR ISMAIL 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: PGOV KJUS KCOR ID
SUBJECT: BILL COULD WEAKEN INDONESIA'S CORRUPTION 
ERADICATION COMMISSION 
 
REF: JAKARTA 1281 AND PREVIOUS 
 
JAKARTA 00001313  001.2 OF 002 
 
 
¶1.  (U) This message is Sensitive but Unclassified. 
 
¶2.  (SBU) SUMMARY:  Parliament is debating a new bill that 
would strip Indonesia's Corruption Eradication Commission 
(KPK) of its prosecutorial powers, rendering the KPK an 
investigative and preventative organization.  Although this 
legislation--and another draft bill under review--could be 
detrimental to the KPK as an institution, it does not signal 
an end to corruption prosecutions, as the Attorney General's 
Office (AGO) would pick up the prosecutorial load. 
Nevertheless, the anti-corruption NGO community is 
dissatisfied with the bill, as other provisions in the new 
anti-corruption bill could hamper Indonesia's corruption 
eradication efforts.  END SUMMARY. 
 
CORRUPTION CRIME BILL 
 
¶3.  (SBU) To fulfill international obligations, Indonesia's 
Parliament is deliberating a new corruption law.  Parliament 
was obligated to draft a revised Corruption Crime Law after 
the GOI signed the United Nations Convention Against 
Corruption (UNCAC) in 2003.  Parliament passed a law on UNCAC 
ratification in 2006.  Indonesia currently has two corruption 
related laws: the 2001 Anti-Graft Law and the 2002 Law on the 
Corruption Eradication Commission. 
 
NEW BILL TO STRIP THE KPK OF PROSECUTORIAL POWERS 
 
¶4.  (SBU) The latest bill, in combination with draft 
legislation regarding the Anti-Corruption Court (ACC), 
represent a parliamentary effort to circumscribe the KPK's 
powers.  (Note:  Established in 2002, the ACC's mandate was 
to handle cases involving high-level government officials, 
significant losses to the state, or strong public interest. 
The ACC only hears cases brought by the KPK.  In 2006, the 
Constitutional Court declared that the ACC was 
unconstitutional and gave Parliament until December 2009 to 
pass a revised law on the body.  Although Parliament is 
debating this bill, observers are not optimistic that 
Parliament will pass the bill in time.) 
 
¶5.  (SBU) The new bill would strip the KPK of its 
prosecutorial powers.  The KPK would still be authorized to 
engage in preventive anti-corruption measures.  In the 
government version of the bill, the prosecution and hearing 
of corruption cases would be conducted according to the 
Criminal Procedure Code Law.  The Criminal Procedure Code 
stipulates that the National Police are responsible for the 
investigation of crimes and that prosecutors from the 
Attorney General's Office (AGO) are responsible for 
prosecuting crimes.  Although the KPK would be permitted to 
investigate cases, they would need to hand the cases to the 
AGO for prosecution. 
 
ATTORNEY GENERAL'S OFFICE COULD PICK UP CASE LOAD 
 
¶6.  (SBU) The Attorney General's Office (AGO) could pick up 
the prosecutorial load.  With USG assistance in June 2008, 
the AGO formed a 50-prosecutor task force dedicated to 
prosecuting corruption crimes, whose members were chosen 
through a highly competitive and transparent interview 
process.  Given the KPK,s 100% conviction rate (a rate that 
the AGO has yet to match), many corruption watchers are 
fearful that the AGO would be unable to garner the same 
success as the KPK.  Head of the task force and Deputy 
Attorney General for Special Crimes Marwan Effendy has noted 
that the greatest hurdle for the AGO in prosecuting 
corruption cases was overcoming the number of approvals 
required to bring corruption cases, an institutional barrier 
he has worked to overcome. 
 
NGO'S DISSATISFIED WITH GOVERNMENT VERSION 
 
¶7.  (SBU) The anti-corruption NGO community is dissatisfied 
with the GOI's version of the bill.  Indonesia Corruption 
Watch (ICW) coordinator Emerson Yuntho has said the GOI 
version of the bill would weaken Indonesia's corruption 
eradication efforts and has publicly advocated for its 
revision.  In order to instruct the deliberations, the NGO 
community has written a counter-draft of the anti-corruption 
bill. 
 
JAKARTA 00001313  002.2 OF 002 
 
 
 
¶8.  (SBU) The NGO community identified more than twenty 
problems with the government version of the bill.  The 
government draft did not stipulate minimum or maximum 
sentences for corrupters, giving judges discretion to issue 
lenient sentences.  Corrupters embezzling less than 
approximately $2,500 who agree to return the money could 
avoid criminal charges.  The government version also failed 
to address how to recover state losses, which could allow for 
the possibility of unrecovered embezzled funds.  The lack of 
witness and whistleblower protection in the current version 
would allow a complainant to be sued by a corruption 
defendant. 
 
CORRUPTION BILL COULD HAMPER ANTI-CORRUPTION EFFORTS 
 
¶9.  (SBU) This corruption bill, as written, could roll back 
much of the anti-corruption progress made by Indonesia in the 
last few years.  Although the AGO could pick up the cases not 
prosecuted by the KPK, no institution can overcome structural 
inadequacies in the law, according to ICW.  The NGO version 
of the bill seeks to close these holes in the legislation. 
Unlike the ACC bill, there is no time constraint on the 
Corruption bill, which gives Parliament time to draft a good 
amendment to the current corruption laws. 
 
 
HUME