The issue of friction between Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK) and National Police (Polri) has been popped up (v. muncul) in this country lately through their action in condemnation (n. penersangkaan) of their masters each other. This issue has brought society to nationally pay heed (n. perhatian) on the two big law institution of this country, even being confused.

Sumber

All was started by the desicion of the president Joko (Jokowi) Widodo to appoint (n. pengangkatan) Gen. Budi Gunawan as a single candidate to replace Gen. Sutarman as The Chief of Polri. Before the House of Representative (DPR) legitimated (v. mengesahkan) Gunawan’s to be General Chief of Polri,KPK turned out to condemn him being involved in a graft (n. suap)case. Gunawan actually was red-highlighted by KPK beforehand in ministry selection process.

This condemnation made the President suspend (v. menunda) his inauguration due to the investigation of KPK to his case. In the other hand Polri eventually proceeded a handcuffing (n. penangkapan) to Bambang Widjayanto, Vice Chief of KPK as a report fromSugianto Sabran, a member of IndonesiaDemocratic Party – Struggle (PDI-P), with accusation for beinginvolved in a case of perjury (n. sumpah palsu) in a regional election dispute (n. sengketa) in 2010.

Obviously seen from the events happening above, KPK and Polri attacked each other in responding their master’s condemnation. This far the rest three chiefs of KPK have been reported to Polri with respective (adv. masing-masing) criminal case.

Responding to this case, President Jokowi had summoned (v. memanggil) both institutions’ leader, ministry of POLHUKAM to discuss about the matter of what really happens between KPK and National Police. After the meeting, Jokowi turned to give his remark (n. pernyataan)in the Bogor Palace.In the remarks he suggested both intitutions keep proceeding the recent case objectively and in line with regulation.

According to the former of Antigraft Watchdog Corruption Watch (ICW) Danang Widyoko, Jokowi was wrong to issue such equivocal (adj. klise) statement. The statement he said was reflecting his doubtedness (n. keragu-raguan) in making firm (adj. tegas) decision to resolve the case since his party was still behind him controlling.

As an institution in the first line of corruption eradication, KPK slowly losses its strength in its function. The conviction (n. penuduhan) of Polri to the four KPK commissioneries is considered to be a dilutoin (n. pelemahan) and an effort to criminalize KPK. Absolutely the effort successfully puts off (v. menunda) KPK investigation to allegedly bribed Kapolri candidate, Gen. Budi Gunawan.

The complicated conflict has made Jokowi formed Tim Sembilan which consists of experts of Indonesia governmetal figures to investigate the case and hoped to give recommendation of overcoming (v. mengatasi) the problem. This step of President even makes things worse because the role of board of advisor (Wantimpres) that he just formed lately is judged useless. At last, President puts himself in problematic position, whether following his party coalition’s will or public’s will.

Meanwhile (n. sementara itu) as Jokowi was in elusive (adj. sukar) condition, Jokowi tried to approach his political opponents, KIH, to cooperate in settling (v. mengatasi) the conflict. Jokowi asked for support from its leader as well as his ex-competitor in presidential election, Prabowo Subianto. The support he finally gained (v. dapatkan) from Prabowo has told Jokowi implicated his planning to get over with KIH, his present party coalition.

Above all, public still puts big hope in president’s shoulder to finish the conflict between KPK and Polri. It has given many impacts for governmental programs though, including in enforcing (v. menegakkan) the law of this country. Furthermore, society along this porgram has learned about the dynamic of recent Indonesia politic. So that, hopefully, public can transform into smarter watcher towards government agenda to create prosperous democracy country in the future.

Author: Muhammad Arham | Fajar Radio Announcer

The government as a policy maker is obligate (v. wajib) to accomodate the needs of every element of society. It also means they have to keep themselves away from self-interest fullfilment (n. pemenuhan) and discrimination. The government should treat societies equally, especially for the blind people in educational sector in order to make sure blind people are not discriminated in terms of education. In fact, there are still several cases that government turned out not to have any concern, even humiliated (v. menghinakan) the blinds.  Therefore (adv. oleh karena itu) this paper will explain unjust (adj. ketidakadilan) treatment of government in educational service for blinds.

http://im.hunt.in/cg/Bhavnagar/City-Guide/blind.jpg

For instance, recently happening in the public schools, schools unreasonably do not accept a blind student due to (phr. karena) the absence of teaching-blind-oriented educational infrastructure and instrument (n. alat). They claim, in studying, the blind students are not able to go together with ordinary students because their visual impairment (phr. keterbatasan penglihatan). Schools are seemingly worried on being hardened by them. Let along (phr. apalagi) most teachers who are complaining being uneducated in teaching blind student and normal students in a mixture (n. percampuran/penggabungan).

In this case, obviously (adv. dengan jelas) seen government does not put sufficient (adj. tidak cukup) concern for improving special teacher for blind in numbers. There should be planning and budgetting provided for increasing the number of the special teachers or in another case training certain teachers in public school for dealing with (phr. berhubungan) class mixture between blind students and ordinary students.

The worst case raises in school admission. The discrimination humiliates the rights of blinds students both directly and indirectly. Direct discrimination happens in Makassar when public schools and universities refused them by including ‘not accepting disabilities’ in their admission requirement. Then indirect discrimination was that the school provided application form in an inaccessible format for blinds, in this case all difables experienced (v. mengalami).

Government with their rights in making social decision have responsibility to look after (phr. membela) diffables’ rights, especially in education service. The concern must be serious and away from perjury (n. janji palsu). Toward education, blind students needs extra support and aid, such as teaching specialists or supportive equipment in classrom and a ramp (n. jalur landai) or special road for their mobilization.

How about if the blind students are in exam? This typical question is the other frequently-asked one by teachers or common people. As has been done so far by Blind Union (PERTUNI) by recruiting volunteers to assist the blind students during their exam, the government should learn that the blinds are a part of society that needs education and there is no way of ignoring (v. mengabaikan) the difficulties to do it. As another reference for government in order to learn how to treat (v. memperlakukan) diffables like blind well, they should learn from government of Australia who put high concern on this issue by providing free, supportive transportation, special ramp for blind and special educational system and instrument for dealing with blind people.

Written By: Rahmat J. | President of HEC

Every country has relation with another country both bilateral and multilateral relation known as International relation. The relation between country and individual or country and international organization is not always plait well. Sometimes this relation causes a dispute between them. The dispute comes from factors such us border area, natural resource, environmental damage, trade etc. when the dispute happens, there are some efforts to solve it whether in diplomatic way or war (military way). This paper will discuss about the best way to resolve international dispute.

Negotiation is one of the diplomatic ways and the most important way in solving a dispute. Some countries prefer to do negotiation as a first step to solve their international dispute. In negotiation, both countries will discuss directly to look for the solution of their dispute through dialogue without intervention from the third side. When negotiation is successful, the result will be poured on peace agreement document. Unfortunately, there is no guarantee that negotiation will solve the dispute because one of parties is stubborn and maintain its opinion especially when the country has stronger bargain. There will be political stress to the week country.

Moreover, military way (war) is also claimed and practiced internationally/globally. Even war has become a tool and international policy. War has been used by some countries to force their interests in the forms of rights and understandings about international public rule. War is an action of independence country. The Minister of Foreign Affairs of the U.S, Robert Lansing, in 1919 says;to declare war is one of the highest acts of sovereignty. However, because of the development of weapon of mass destruction technology, international society becomes more aware about the danger of war. In addition to that, war will not resolve the dispute. Instead, war will create bigger dispute between countries because war means violence. In the war there will be some irresponsible countries that will take advantage from the war by selling their guns or doing military intervention on one of them.

To sum up, solving the dispute between countries in international world is important. Both negotiation and military action are the rights of every country in the world. Each government has right to decide the best way of solving the dispute. As independence country we must maintain our international relation with other countries. Government must put every diplomatic possibility as first way to resolve the dispute. In order that war will not become the way of solving the dispute or at least we decrease the using of war.

Written by : ZakiaKhyadhanielZaskia