TEMPO.CO, Jakarta - The Functional Group (Golkar) faction at the House of Representatives has declared its support for four points of revision of Law No. 30/2002 on the Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK).
Lawmaker from Golkar Bambang Soesatyo revealed on Tuesday, February 2, 2015 that his party was one of the parties behind the revision idea. Bambang, who serves as chairman of House of Representatives’ Commission III overseeing legal affairs, claimed that KPK’s tapping operations had violated the Standard Operational Procedures (SOP).
“Some [tapping operations] were conducted for the sake of KPK leaders’ interests. For example tapping their mistresses, tapping other KPK leaders and others,” Bambang said without revealing the information source.
According to Bambang, stricter regulations must be applied to institutions holding high authorities.
“As Mr. Luhut said, even Vatican is supervised. A KPK supervisory institution must be established. But, the members must consist of people with high integrity,” Bambang added.
Bambang explained that it would be too early to say that the KPK Law revision could weaken the anti-graft commission. Bambang revealed that the revision was in the process of harmonization at the House’s Legislation Board (Baleg).
Bambang revealed that Baleg would invite this week to discuss the draft before being taken to the leaders’ meeting and the House’s Consultative Body (Bamus).
“It will be decided whether a special committee of the commission will work on the draft revision,” he added.
Earlier on February 1, 2016, the KPK Law draft revision was discussed by Baleg. The draft was proposed by 45 House members from six House’s factions, namely the Indonesia Democratic Party of Struggle (PDIP), the National Democratic (NasDem) Party, the Functional Group (Golkar), the United Development Party (PPP), the People’s Conscience Party (Hanura), and the National Awakening Party (PKB).
The new draft contains four points of the law to be revised, namely those related to tapping operations, the establishment of a supervisory body, KPK’s investigators and independent investigators, and the letter of order to stop investigation (SP3).
ANGELINA ANJAR SAWITRI
