Disputes on Indonesia’s Defense Corruption Index - crown eco management international relations Others

Ramadhan Pohan, the deputy chairman of House Commission I that oversees defense issues, questioned the validity of results from a recent survey conducted by watchdog Transparency International UK. In the survey, whose results were announced earlier this week, Indonesia was given an E, one step above the lowest score, in the Government Defense Anti-Corruption Index. The score meant that Indonesia is considered to be at “very high risk” of corruption. Ramadhan said that the results of the survey were baseless. “Who does it involve, where is the evidence? If one accuses without providing the evidence, that is tyrannical,” said Ramadhan, a lawmaker from the ruling Democratic Party.
He said that if there were any violation, he would not hinder any legal process. But he added that law enforcement could not be based on opinion and perception. “There should be at least two [forms of] evidence, and it is then eligible for it to start a legal process,” said Ramadhan, who is also deputy secretary general of the Democratic Party. Indonesia was given the same rank as Afghanistan, Iraq, Uganda, Zimbabwe and the Philippines. Among those countries ranking even lower were Libya, Egypt and Cameroon. Only two of the 82 countries surveyed had the top A grade — Germany and Australia.
Britain-based Transparency International said in its report that the Indonesian defense sector is dominated by cartels of political parties through lawmakers sitting in House Commission I. The Indonesian armed forces is also mentioned as providing support to industries in the mining and forestry sector as well as being involved in drug trade and gambling operations. Transparency International also criticized transparency within the military, saying that there were no supervision mechanisms that could control “ghost” budgets within the ranks. It also said there were indications of a bribery culture that remained strong within the military. The group pointed to the absence of both education on anticorruption and of a system to protect whistleblowers.
It said that although the procurements of goods and services are done openly corruption still found its way into the process. It also said that the Corruption Eradication Comission (KPK), which has been credited with battling corruption, is deemed not to have the ability to look into defense. – The Jakarta Globe











▲ PageTop