The
Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK) has suggested that the optimization funds
be taken out of the state budget because it suspected they were prone to being
misused by corrupt House of Representatives members. A number of legislators
are alleged to have acted as brokers to champion certain projects to receive
funding.
The
optimization funds, which amounted to Rp 58.36 trillion in the 2016 revised
state budget, were meant to be a change from macro-management so as to meet the
state revenue target and increase the efficiency of state spending. The fund
was supposed to be used for the additional spending of ministries and state
institutions, as well as regional spending.
The
project that was "managed" by I Putu Sudiartana, a House of
Representatives Commission III member with the Democratic Party who was
arrested by the KPK on Tuesday, was allegedly funded out the optimization
funds. The project was the construction of 12 road segments in West Sumatra
worth Rp 300 billion.
In his
efforts to manage the project, Putu, who has been named as a suspect by the
KPK, allegedly accepted Rp 500 million in bribes.
The
KPK's deputy for prevention, Pahala Nainggolan, on Thursday (30/6/2016) said
that there have been a few examples of corruption involving the optimization
funds. For example, there was the case of former Commission V lawmaker
Damayanti Wisnu Putranti who was arrested by the KPK in January for allegedly
receiving a bribe linked to a road project in Maluku.
Former
House budget committee member, Wa Ode Nurhayati, was accused of receiving a
bribe for helping some regencies get onto a list of recipients for the 2011
regional infrastructure adjustment funds.
Influence
A
budget committee member from the Hanura Party, Dadang Rusdiana, said that
principally the allocation details of the optimization funds are determined by
the Finance Ministry and House budget committee. However, in its formulation,
House members who have extensive connections can influence the government's
allocation decisions. Such House members may or may not sit on the budget
committee.
House
members who act as brokers would contact a regional government or a
businessperson in a certain region who wants to receive some of the
optimization funds. The House member then asks the regional government or
businessperson to send him their proposals, which the legislator will then
support by lobbying the central government.
Usually,
as recompense, the House member would receive a bribe or kickback from the
businessman or regional government seeking to land the project. "Whatever
system is put in place, it will still be breached by some members of the House.
The loopholes will always be there," Dadang said.
A
budget committee member from the National Democratic Party faction, Johnny G.
Plate, added that the malfeasance could take place at the state budget
committee level because the optimization funds are deliberated and decided
there. "However, usually the opportunity to lobby presents itself outside
of the committee's deliberations. In fact, by the time it reaches the committee,
it seems as though everything is in accordance to the rules," he said.
Commission
V Chairman Fary Djemi Francis said that the project involving 12 road segments
in West Sumatra, which was allegedly managed by Putu, was never discussed by
Commission V when it was first proposed by a work partner. The project only
came up after the discussion was continued by the budget committee and the
government.
"Commission
V also does not know the details because we have never discussed road projects
in regions in our initial deliberations. If it is like that, then it could be
that it was regional transfer spending that was deliberated by the budget
committee," Fary said.
Meanwhile,
Johnny Plate explained that the road project in West Sumatra managed by Putu
had been included in the spending list of the Public Works and Public Housing
Ministry. He said it is possible that the project was inserted at the work
committee level at the budget committee because it did not come up in the
initial proposal to the commission.
Budgeting mechanism
The KPK
has recommended that the optimization funds be abolished. The result of the
KPK's study of the funds in the 2014 state budget has shown that there was
potential corruption in the form of requested programs at ministries and
institutions through them. This is indicated by, among other things, the KPK's
analysis of the preview of the process, planning and use of the 2014 state
budget, which shows programs or activities that used optimization funds that
were not proposed by the ministry or the institutions.
Furthermore,
there were also programs that were not proposed to the Finance Ministry and the
National Development Planning Agency and also were not in accordance with the
strategic plan. Some of the final results of the programs that used
optimization funds were unclear and could not be measured.
Generally,
the KPK is also working to close the "dark" spaces in the House
budgeting system that are often taken advantage of by project brokers. The KPK
plans to recommend the formation of a team to oversee the crucial stages of
budgeting, as well as the removal of the optimization funds from the state
budget.
KPK
deputy chairman Laode M. Syarif said that the KPK will propose the involvement
of a KPK team as observers during every budget deliberation at Commission V,
which oversees infrastructure. He hopes that Commission V can give information
about the stages of deliberation that are prone to corruption so that the KPK
can carry out prevention measures before corruption takes place.
"We
realize that the KPK does not have the right to intervene in internal House
affairs, but if the KPK is asked it will be ready to help so that such
incidents do not happen again in the future," Laode said.
Regional
Autonomy Monitoring Committee executive director Robert Endi Jaweng said that
supervision over planning, budgeting and disbursement must be tightened.
Robert
also said the Constitutional Court ruling of 2014 that stated that the House no
longer had authority over certain activities and kinds of spending must be
implemented.
"With
that Constitutional Court ruling, the House cannot discuss a budget down to the
details of a project. As termed, the authority of the House is over the budget
politics. This means that the House's job is to ensure that the budget politics
is in line with the national development priorities," Endi said.
However,
the arrest of Putu and a number of other House members by the KPK for allegedly
accepting bribes linked to certain projects indicates that House members still
have a say over everything, down to the details of the project.
House
speaker Ade Komarudin said that he does not mind if the supervision of the
budget deliberation process is stepped up. "Maybe tighter supervision can
be done of the budget deliberation process, from the commission to the budget
committee. Prevention is needed because the loopholes are always around there,"
Ade said.
If the
optimization funds prove to bring about more corruption in the House, Ade
proposed that the situation be resolved by using budgeting and macro-assumption
determining models that are more accurate. "Of course, this must be
discussed with the other House speakers, as well as with the finance
minister," Ade said.
National
Development Planning Minister Sofyan Djalil said that to prevent the state
budget from becoming a corruption minefield, the government is trying to focus
on funds and programs that are the priorities. The government is also trying to
do the same at the central and regional levels.
source
Kompas, Friday, July 1, 2016
