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 Policy of President Joko Widodo (Jokowi) refusing clemency (n. grasi/ampunan) of the death penalty for the six drug traffickers (n. pengedar) gets pros and cons (phr. pro dan kontra) responses from the public this early day. As it is known, the death sentence has brought six lifes into their end of drug traffickers, they are Marco Archer Cardoso Moreira from Brazil, Rani Andriani and Tommi Wijaya from Indonesia, Tran Thi Bich Hanh from Vietnam, Namaona Denis from Malawi, and Daniel Enemuo from Nigeria. However this policy making has drawn (v. menarik) international attention to give response, let along Indonesian people.

islaminindonesia.files.wordpress.com

     Those who do not agree with this policy argue that death penalty which takes person’s life is murder and it violates (v. melanggar) human rights as set (v. diatur) in article 28 A 1945 "every person has the right to live and to defend life and living". Jakarta Archbishop (n. uskup besar) Mgr. Ignatius Suharyo in Tribunnews.com said that life and death of a person is not in the hands of man, and this is contrary to the teachings of the church. Jokowi gives the decision as if all dealers are guilty and should be put on death penalty. "He (Jokowi) does not see the reason of the drug traffickers, it should be revised and examined one by one, the death penalty will not solve the problem," adds Ignatius. Meanwhilst (adv. sementara itu) those who agree said that the death penalty can give the effect of abundant and provide lessons for other traffickers who have not been caught yet.
       On the other hand, the Head of the National Narcotic Province Agency "BNNP" of South Sulawesi, Richard M Nainggolan approves (v. menyetujui) the decision which has been taken by Jokowi. He said "The death penalty should be carried out to the drug traffickers who are really proven, so that others feel threatened (v. terancam)". In order to legitimate the death penalty, the legal process should be based on Law, Human Rights, Health, and should be through assessment. This will determine whether the results will prove it is the trafficker or only user or addict. Those who proved to be an addict must be rehabilitated and those who proved to be a dealer (n. pedagang) must get death penalty.
      In constitution 1997 No.22 about narcotics, article 80 paragraph (1a, 2a and 3a), article 81 paragraph (3a), article 82 paragraph (1a, 2a, and 3a) the death penalty does not violate human rights, which is guaranteed in article 28A and international law obligations of Indonesia which come from an international agreement on combating illicit (adj. haram) trafficking in narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances so that law enforcement needs to be improved. Moreover Indonesia does not adhere (v. menganut) to the absolute human rights law as stated in the article 28J paragraph (2) that everyone should respect other people's rights and peace to to get their rights. So that it can break the protection of human rights contained in Article 28A.
       Departing from the legal basis, it can be concluded that the death penalty for drug traffickers who would have been convicted  through (phr. dihukum) due law process and assessment must be carried out (phr. diadakan) because it can provide lessons and prevalent effects to other traffickers who have not been caught so that the drug traffickers will be decreased, and probably be stopped.

Questions.
1. What is in your mind about death senctence? What if it is implemented to criminals? What kind  of crimes that deserve it?
2. Do you agree about Jokowi’s decision to reject petition for mercy of the six drug traffickers?
3. What do you know about the result of the Jokowi’s rejection? Is it good for our country?
4. How drugs give bad impact to our society? How to resolve it?
5. How should law behave to user, addict, and traffickers of drugs?

       Written By: Mila | English Department Bachelor

The issue of female representative in parliament becomes a hot debate in the next year election. As we have known that, Indonesia will hold the general election where many cadres of politic parties will complete one another o be elected. Talking about female representative, there are two sides that become the main focus in this essay. There are the increasing of women resources and a bit space supplied by politic party. This essay argue about the number of women in parliament which never reach 30% of quotes because they have lack of chance and their quality is still questionable.

Involving in politic is one way to rise up the women abilities. By participating in politic, women will get sufficient accesses and facilities that can accommodate them and benefit their interest. Women can fight for their right especially in education and health issue. But the question is how could the 30% quotes of women fulfilled by the politic parties if there is no chance for women?

However, women have no chance to be a member of parliament. It could happen because some politicians think that only a few women to be involved in politic. We can see from  the number of men which is bigger than women and it cause the women interest is not accommodate well in parliament’s policy. Not only to be member of parliament but also in daily practice level like organize the politic party itself. Most of boards in politic partied are men. For example : democrat party, one of big parties in Indonesia. Has only 5 women inside. Starting from the senator until the coordinator of division most of them are men. These are the board of Democrat party lead by SBY, Marzuki Ali and Jero wacik. The coordinator of division are H.M Gagoek Soebagyanto, SH, Yosef Tahir Ma’ruf. This example is an evidence that politic parties do not serious to recruit women. A 30% quotes as a requirement to be candidate in election can not give a chance to women to get involved in parliament.

Women seen like to stand in parliament intersection. In one side, they have a good purpose to make a balance between the women and men interest in politic. But in other side, they are limited by the little chance. Beside that, the quality of women to be member of parliament is still questionable. People think that they are not really serious to involve in politic. In the previous election, there were several women involved in politic whether they were artist, singer, presenter or model. Although they had not politic background previously but they were still candidate by politic party. In fact that they were not been chosen because people know about their background and doubt about their politic qualities.

In conclusion, both chance and quality are important things to support female for participating in parliament. About 30% of women quotes could not be fulfilled until now because only some women have enough ability to compete with men to be elected in parliament

Picture : http://www.dw.de
by : Zakia | Moslem University of Indonesia

Death penalty is one of the controversial punishments in every country. There are many kinds of opinion and reason to support or opposite (v=menentang) the death penalty. Actually, the purposes of the death penalty are to reduce the number of crime and violation, to solve conflicts caused by criminal, to recover the balance and to wreak (v=mendatangkan) piece in society, and to give wary (adj=jera) impact and strong warning to society.

According to KUHP, there are several kinds of crime that must be addressed death penalty such as tricky tactic, pogrom (n=pembunuhan berencana), terrorism, violation of human’s right and drugs.

Today, there have been so many pros and conts developing in society whether to erase or to defend the death penalty. In one side, government, some societies and organizations support death penalty because it is suitable for the people who do serious violation to the nation’s rules. This is not a problem to do. However, they think that we have to also consider about the criminals’ rights. They have to be treated fairly without compulsion (n=paksaan). In this case, criminals have their rights to be accompanied by lawyers. In our religion, death penalty or qisash isn’t something forbidden. According to spokesman (n=juru bicara) of Hizbut Tahrir Indonesia (HTI), Ismail Yusanto, death penalty is a command from God and it couldn’t be deleted because they are very sure that a punishment given in the world can help us out afterlife. For example, Rajam, a punishment given to those who do sexual intercourse (n=hubungan) without official marriage, is believed be able to purify (v=menyucikan) their mistreatment afterlife (n=akhirat).

In the other side, there are many people oppose the death penalty because they think that every human has fundamental rights and one of them is “a right to live”. It couldn’t be confined (v=dibatasi), decreased or seized (v=direbut) whatever the condition. It is in step (adv=sejalan) with section 28A and 28I of UUD 1945. By committing death penalty, it means the government, the law enforcer, breaks the human right. In addition, death penalty isn’t trusted yet able to give wary effect or stop the crime. It’s been widely known that several death penalty have been committed to some terrorists some years ago, hoping that the number of terrorism can be declined (v=menurun). Today, however, terrorism threat still widely persists (v=berlangsung), embellishment (n=pembunuhan) happens everywhere, and drugs is still easily distributed around Indonesia.

As of now, there have been no clear and practical solutions for death penalty issue. There are many considerations we have to pay attention on if we want to vanish (v=menghilangkan) it. If the government insists (v=menuntut) to commit death penalty to above mentioned crimes, they have to be audacious (adj=berani) and strict (adj=tegas) in applying it.

So, do you think death penalty is necessary to commit? Share your ideas in our discussion!

HEC on!

by Zakia – Moslem University of Indonesia

Every 17th of August, every year, we commemorate our beloved country's independence, Indonesia. Indonesia has been independent since 1945. That means that we have commemorated the independence of Indonesia for 65 times. And today, August 17, 2011, we commemorate the 66th independence of Indonesia. 

Indonesia is one of the countries that gained its independence with great difficulty. Citizens had to fight against the invaders like the British, Dutch, Portuguese, and Japanese who came alternately. Indonesia struggled crucially at the time. In addition to the weapons and war equipment were inadequate, citizens were also still not quite good at fighting so they often did guerrilla war. Indonesia took about more than 350 years to be independent from colonialism. Hundreds of thousands of people and warriors were killed during that time until finally, on August 17, 1945, Sukarno and Hatta declared the independence of Indonesia. 

Since then, Indonesia formally became an independent state. Nevertheless, the struggle did not end there. Most of the invaders countries did not acknowledge our independence. Consequently, to defend the sovereignty (kedaulatan) of the state, Indonesia had still to struggle. There is one quote which states that freedom is difficult to achieve, but it is far more difficult to defend it. It is true indeed, and that's what happened in our country at that time. People and warriors had to back to fight and not a few among them died in the war. 

If we look at history, both achieving and defending the independence of our country, hundreds of thousands of people had to die to pay the price. Therefore, we should be thankful, because at this time, we do not have to do bloody battle to defend the independence that we have achieved. The problem is, most of us, in my experience, do not realize how valuable the struggle of the warriors in the past to obtain this independence so that what we see along the road every August 17 is just a meaningless noise. I'm not saying that the celebration of August 17 is not important. Only, we are always seduced by pleasure, so we often forget the true meaning of the independence itself. 

Proves? Every year the people of Indonesia both domestically and abroad, rabble (rakyat jelata) up to the officials commemorate the Independence Day of Indonesia. However, there are still many cases that do not reflect an appreciation of the independence itself. For example, corruption still occurs everywhere. In the past, the problem was how to be independent from the colonizers, while the current problem is how to be independent from the corruptors. I often shake my head when watching the television showing the cases about corruption. People just did corruption as if they were free to do it. They didn’t care about how hard the independence was acquired. They just think how they could become rich by exploiting the State. I’m wandering, what would they do if they find themselves in the same situations to the previous warriors? 

There are various ways that we can do to defend this independence, nowadays. Certainly, we do not need bleeding just like the previous warriors. In my opinion, as good citizens, to defend this independence, we can engage in various fields such as education, economics, law, and other fields. In economics for example, by increasing our income and encouraging others to do the same thing, we already participate in advancing this nation, and that is, of course, one manifestation of the State defense. In education? Well, we can become experts in our field of study, so that the country will no longer need to import specialists or experts from abroad. Anyway, there are many ways, you just choose one or more of them. (@visionasc)

by Naskar Hansam | Hasanuddin University

Indonesia as a law country is being crisis in law itself now. Not only caused by some citizens who do not obey the law, but also the law enforcer could not maintain the law itself well. Most citizens begin to not believe the government or the law enforcer anymore. The jurisdiction (=pengadilan) as a justice institution have not been able to give satisfaction to the citizen, especially to low society. It is proven by many incidents happen in this country. Corruptors which has been proven that they do corruption is still free to go anywhere, even go abroad. In fact, they have corrupted millions or billions rupiahs citizen money. On the other hand, in some small village in this country, pickpockets (=copet) or little thief usually get many violent as a punishment of little crime they have done. Even though, they steal because they are perforce (=terpaksa) to do that. They are perforce to steal just to fulfill their daily needs. It is clearly not fair. The corruptors which have stolen great much citizen money get lower punishment than little criminalist citizen get. 

Police as one of law enforcer who have to cover and protect citizen could not give good service to them. Sometimes, some of them misuse their job to get extra money, beside their salary as police. They only think about their self without obey the regulation. A criminalist, such as drugs consumer or drugs distributor, can go out freely from the prison by giving money with certain number of money. It makes the criminalist doesn’t need to law process anymore after paying. It seems money can control the law enforcer, not law itself. Beside money, party need of certain community will be the first priority than society need overall, as long as they can pay the law enforcer. 

Let’s take a look in one of corruption case in this country. About two years ago, Century Bank case was being hot discussion topic. Sri Mulyani, previous Economic minister of Indonesia, was accused corrupting some number of money on that bank.. In her law process, she rarely attended her jurisdiction and law enforcer couldn’t do something more to present her in jurisdiction. It seemed, as economic minister, law didn’t give any sense on her. It had been clear that the government is not fair in enforcing law in our lovely country, moreover, when she got job offer from World Bank in America. Now, Mrs. Sri Mulyani can do her daily activities on abroad much better than she was in Indonesia. Even though, she still has case in Indonesia which she has to finish. Her law process is not discussed anymore like blowing wind. It is like being forgotten. Indonesia law doesn’t give any sense on her case. That was one of sample that law enforcement in our country is very poor. 

In one survey named “world justice project 2011 rule of law”, there were 65 countries had been surveyed about their law enforcement. In this survey, Indonesia was in rank 47 in global. It means corruption has been grown significantly in Indonesia and law have not been able to overcome it yet. 

Finally, to overcome this problem, we have to have clear law which is able to be obeyed by the citizen and can be enforced by the law enforcer. We don’t have to reconstruct our law. The thing we have to do is improve our law system by observing every false point in our law system. The most important thing we have to do is educate our children well as the next generation of our country. (are_home)

by Muhammad Arham | Hasanuddin University