TEMPO.CO, Jakarta - Richard Joost Lino got word that he had been indicted for corruption one hour before the Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK) broke the news to the media. That day, on December 18, 2004, Lino and his team gathered in South Jakarta, ahead of their meeting with the House of Representatives' special committee on Pelindo. "I was shocked," Lino said last Tuesday as he recounted the episode to Tempo.
Lino apparently finds it hard to accept the reality. With his attorney Maqdir Ismail, he filed for a pretrial hearing to challenge his indictment by the KPK. Amid his hectic preparations for the hearing, Lino made time to meet with Tempo for a special interview. Throughout the interview, he reiterated his rationale behind the direct appointment of a Chinese company to supply three units of quay container cranes (QCCs) that eventually landed him in hot water. "Look at it objectively. Before the direct appointment, we conducted the tender nine times but always failed [to find a suitable supplier]," he said.
The KPK finally indicted you in the QCC corruption case.
I was taken by surprise. I never imagined I'd become a KPK suspect, although I wondered if becoming a suspect would be the worst-case scenario.
Why are you shocked? Didn't the KPK question you in mid-2014?
At that time, they only asked about the procurement. Just standard questions. I believe there was no problem with the process.
The KPK was investigating the procurement of three QCCs based on, among others, the audit by the Finance and Development Supervisory Agency (BPKP).
Correct. But I don't understand why it was deemed illegal. Since 2007, before I joined Pelindo II, six tenders had been held but nothing ever came out of them. When I came aboard in 2009, three more tenders were held and again there was no result. Therefore, at the end of 2009, I decided to appoint the supplier directly.
What was your reason for it?
We have an internal regulation called State-Owned Enterprises Ministerial Decree No. 5/2008, which stipulates that a direct appointment can be made if a tender process fails more than once. At the time, ships had to wait in line at the ports for more than two weeks. The same decree also allows for direct appointments to secure critical assets. Well, cranes are critical for freight loading and unloading.
How did the process go?
Before the direct appointment, we tried a direct selection. We invited two manufacturers from China and Korea for QCC single-lift types with a 40-ton capacity. The first offered a below-ceiling price but for the twin-lift type with a 60-ton capacity. Their price was even lower than that of the single-lift type offered by the second manufacturer.
Shouldn't direct appointment be held only in emergency situations?
For me at that time, the condition was very, very urgent. Before I began cleaning up, loading-unloading fees at the Pontianak port reached Rp6 million. It is now only Rp2 million.
Is an emergency situation determined by the ministry?
Not quite. Imagine holding nine tenders and no results. If I didn't make a quick decision, the state would stand to lose even more. I was paid a high salary to make decisions. (Lino said he earned Rp7.5 billion annually). Ships were 'piling up' everywhere, and yes, I took that chance. In 2012, we held the tender and bought the same equipment from the same supplier, albeit at a higher price.
When you decided to appoint the supplier, did you coordinate with the SOEs ministry?
It wasn't necessary. It was a management decision that did not require the ministry's approval.
The KPK has indicated suspected markups and alterations to QCC's specifications from single- to twin-lift units.
In essence, the single-lift type can transport 600-700-ton freight, and the twin-type 1000-1100 tons. Quite different. (*)
Read the full interview in this week's edition of Tempo English Magazine
Richard Joost Lingot word that he had been indicted for corruption one hour before the Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK) broke the news to the media. That day, on December 18, 2004, Lino and his team gathered in South Jakarta, ahead of their meeting with the House of Representatives' special committee on Pelindo. "I was shocked," Lino said last Tuesday as he recounted the episode to Tempo.
Lino apparently finds it hard to accept the reality. With his attorney Maqdir Ismail, he filed for a pretrial hearing to challenge his indictment by the KPK. Amid his hectic preparations for the hearing, Lino made time to meet with Tempo for a special interview. Throughout the interview, he reiterated his rationale behind the direct appointment of a Chinese company to supply three units of quay container cranes (QCCs) that eventually landed him in hot water. "Look at it objectively. Before the direct appointment, we conducted the tender nine times but always failed (to find a suitable supplier)," he said.
The KPK finally indicted you in the QCC corruption case.
I was taken by surprise. I never imagined I'd become a KPK suspect, although I wondered if becoming a suspect would be the worst-case scenario.
Why are you shocked? Didn't the KPK question you in mid-2014?
At that time, they only asked about the procurement. Just standard questions. I believe there was no problem with the process.
The KPK was investigating the procurement of three QCCs based on, among others, the audit by the Finance and Development Supervisory Agency (BPKP).
Correct. But I don't understand why it was deemed illegal. Since 2007, before I joined Pelindo II, six tenders had been held but nothing ever came out of them. When I came aboard in 2009, three more tenders were held and again there was no result. Therefore, at the end of 2009, I decided to appoint the supplier directly.
What was your reason for it?
We have an internal regulation called State-Owned Enterprises Ministerial Decree No. 5/2008, which stipulates that a direct appointment can be made if a tender process fails more than once. At the time, ships had to wait in line at the ports for more than two weeks. The same decree also allows for direct appointments to secure critical assets. Well, cranes are critical for freight loading and unloading.
How did the process go?
Before the direct appointment, we tried a direct selection. We invited two manufacturers from China and Korea for QCC single-lift types with a 40-ton capacity. The first offered a below-ceiling price but for the twin-lift type with a 60-ton capacity. Their price was even lower than that of the single-lift type offered by the second manufacturer.
Shouldn't direct appointment be held only in emergency situations?
For me at that time, the condition was very, very urgent. Before I began cleaning up, loading-unloading fees at the Pontianak port reached Rp6 million. It is now only Rp2 million.
Is an emergency situation determined by the ministry?
Not quite. Imagine holding nine tenders and no results. If I didn't make a quick decision, the state would stand to lose even more. I was paid a high salary to make decisions. (Lino said he earned Rp7.5 billion annually). Ships were 'piling up' everywhere, and yes, I took that chance. In 2012, we held the tender and bought the same equipment from the same supplier, albeit at a higher price.
When you decided to appoint the supplier, did you coordinate with the SOEs ministry?
It wasn't necessary. It was a management decision that did not require the ministry's approval.
The KPK has indicated suspected markups and alterations to QCC's specifications from single- to twin-lift units.
In essence, the single-lift type can transport 600-700-ton freight, and the twin-type 1000-1100 tons. Quite different.
