TEMPO.CO, Jakarta - The House of Representatives (DPR) has no reason to delay the fit-and-proper tests of candidate commissioners of the Business Competition Supervisory Commission (KPPU). The delays only create uncertainty in the commission leadership and cause problems for the resolution of cases it is responsible for.
President Joko Widodo submitted the 18 names of candidate commissioners to the DPR on November 22, more than a month before the term of the previous commissioners expired on December 27. The DPR had enough time to select nine new commissioners. By comparison, DPR Commission III completed the selection of the seven National Human Rights Commission members in only 10 days after the president submitted the names of the candidates.
But Commission VI has yet to conduct the fit-and-proper tests. As a result, President Jokowi has had to extend the term of the commissioners twice, which will now end on April 27. The KPPU can function again, and the cases it is handling are not left in limbo. Perhaps there have been no negative effects due to this term extension.
But the problem does not lie with the government: the resolution is entirely in the hands of the DPR, which must immediately carry out its duty that has been delayed for four months. According to media reports, the reason given by Commission VI is that the KPPU Selection Committee is not independent. Some of the members are even involved with cases being handled by the KPU.
It is difficult to accept this excuse. The selection committee is appointed by the President. The job of Commission VI is to choose among the candidates put forward by the President. It then proposes the results of its selection at a plenary session of the DPR. The Commission or the DPR can reject all or some of the candidates. In March 2008, DPR Commission IX rejected two candidates for governor of Bank Indonesia put forward by President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono: Agus Martowardojo and Raden Pardede. President Yudhoyono subsequently proposed Boediono as a new candidate.
And why did the DPR not raise this matter before the Selection committee began its work? Why, only after 18 people were selected, did they become angry? Is there something 'unspoken' by Commission VI behind this delay? It is as if the DPR is 'shooting the messenger', and not making a fuss about who among the 18 candidates nominated by the President is right for the job.
The Selection Committee led by economist Hendri Saparini surely does not want to tarnish the reputation it has built over decades merely for some short-term interest. The same is true for the other Committee members such as management expert Rhenald Kasali, Gadjah Mada University Deputy Dean for Cooperatives and Alumni Affairs Made Paripurna P. Sugarda, or attorney Alexander Lay.
Furthermore, the selection process was transparent and involved professional institutions. The assessment of the fit-and-proper test results was also appropriate. For example, it was carried out by two anonymous people to avoid accusations of favoritism. The Committee also asked for input from National Police Headquarters, the Centre for the Reporting and Analysis of Financial Transactions, the Corruption Eradication Commission and the Attorney General's Office.
So there is no valid reason to question the selection process. Commission VI and the DPR leadership must provide a clear explanation for the delay.
Read the full article in this week's edition of Tempo English Magazine
