TEMPO.CO, Jakarta - The Justice and Human Rights Ministry does not seem to regard corruption as a major crime. The gift of parole for businesswoman Hartati Murdaya shows the lack of any sincere desire to rid our society of that disease. Instead of than applying strict conditions when a convicted corruptor is released, the ministry broke its own rules and gave the former member of the Democrat Party Advisory Council special treatment.
Hartati should not have received this 'gift'. She was proven to have bribed Amran Batalipu, the regent of Buol, Central Sulawesi, with Rp3 billion to smooth the way for the issuance of a plantation and business permit for two companies. In February, the Corruption Court sentenced her to two years and eight months in jail. Amran was jailed for seven years and six months.
It is true that Governmental Regulation No. 99/2012 states that inmates in special cases, including corruption, are eligible for parole. The justice minister, who drew up the regulation, also imposed strict conditions on the parole. Besides having served two-thirds of the jail term, inmates must have a letter of recommendation from the law enforcement authorities. In the case of Hartati, the organization with the right to issue the recommendation letter was the Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK). Another condition is that the person being granted parole must be a justice collaborator who has helped solve other crimes.
Although she had served two-thirds of her term, Hartati did not fulfil the other two conditions. She did not obtain a recommendation letter from the KPK. The favoritism that the Justice Ministry showed Hartati was apparent in this process. The ministry stated that it had asked the KPK for a recommendation letter, but that this had not arrived by the end of the 12-day deadline. On this basis, according to Government Regulation No. 12/2012-if there is no response from the KPK, the recommendation can be ignored-the ministry granted the parole.
If the ministry is serious about eradicating corruption, why not contact the KPK before allowing the parole for Hartati? It should not have been difficult at all in this era of high information technology. So now the distinct impression is that the ministry intentionally allowed the KPK to respond belatedly. It is easy to guess the motive: so that the minister can justify granting parole to this former member of the Presidential Advisory Council.
The 'desire' to make things easy for Hartati was also seen from the way the ministry took shortcuts with other regulations. Parole should only be granted to inmates who cooperate with the authorities to solve crimes. Clearly this does not apply to Hartati. She consistently denied her involvement from the initial questioning all the way through the trial, despite clear evidence of recorded conversations that proved she played a role in the bribery.
The parole granted to Hartati adds to our concerns over the trend of weakness shown towards corruptors. At almost the same time, the Corruption Court passed a lenient sentence on Atut Chosiyah, who was found guilty of bribing former Supreme Court Chief Justice Akil Mochtar. The prosecution had demanded a 10-year sentence, but the judges sentenced her to only four years in jail. The substance of the two cases was the same: the sentences for corruptors were not in line with the gravity of their crimes.
It is wrong to 'spoil' convicted corruptors as in these two cases. If it wants to show genuine good intention in the fight against corruption, the Justice Ministry must cancel the 'legally flawed' parole granted to Hartati Murdaya. (*)
