Cicak Vs Buaya Case: Mahfud MD's Role In Dismantling Police And KPK's Feud

A protester from the KPK Care Alliance, brought a replica of wayang in the form of a cicak and a crocodile at the Suryo Surabaya Governor Monument complex, Wednesday (4/11/2009). (ANTARA/Bhakti Pundhowo/EI/ed/pd/09)

JAKARTA - The Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK) has a big role in uncovering major corruption cases in Indonesia. Andil KPK in dragging Kabareskrim, Susno Duadji, is an example. Susno is considered involved in two corruption cases. The KPK got the information from the wiretapping results.

Malang cannot be rejected. The KPK that intercepted Susno was policed. The Deputy Chairperson of the KPK is like a criminalized case known as Cicak (KPK) VS Buaya (Polri). However, Mahfud MD became the savior and uncovered the case.

The KPK's Nyalism in uncovering corruption cases in Indonesia is high. Their authority is large. This condition made their target not only the high-profile officials. They are also a high-profile official for the KPK. Many corruptors were arrested by the KPK.

This condition made the criminal officials feel disturbed by his life. Efforts to weaken the KPK are the only option to reduce the strength of the anti-rasuah institution. Efforts to weaken the KPK were also present when they got a big case in 2009.

They tried to drag the name of Susno Duadji who was suspected of being a corruption suspect. The Head of the Criminal Investigation Unit of the National Police is considered to be involved in two corruption cases. The security corruption case in the West Java gubernatorial election and the PT Salmah Arowana Lestari (SAL) case belonging to Anggado Widjojo.

The disclosure of the case provoked more attention from the National Police. Susno considers his cell phone to be intercepted by the KPK, which in fact is considered to have no wiretapping rights. The National Police believes that the actions taken by the KPK are also an act against the law.

The police questioned the Deputy Chairperson of the KPK, Chandra Hamzah and Bibit Samad Rianto. They were later detained and made suspects in September 2009. The decision was followed by a Presidential Decree to temporarily suspend both of them from the position of chairman of the KPK.

The portrait brought a stir throughout Indonesia. People then got to know the case as a Cicak against Crocodiles. This term is taken from an expression created by Susno herself. He considers the KPK as a cicak and the Police as a crocodile. Because crocodiles cannot be defeated by cicak.

If people are prejudiced, I shouldn't be angry, because this position (Kabareskrim) is strategic. But I'm sorry, how come there are still stupid people. How come it's not stupid, something he can't possibly do, how come he's looking for."

When compared, it's like, here the crocodile is funny. Cicak how come it's fighting the crocodile. Are the crocodile angry? No, I'm just sorry: The weather is still stupid. We were the ones who asked for it, but how come it hasn't been around for years. How come you've been given power, how come you're looking for something that won't get anything, "explained Susno in an interview quoted by Anne L. Handayani, Ramidi, and Wahyu Dhyatmika in Tempo magazine entitled Cicak Kok Mau Against Crocodiles (2009).

The case of Cicak VS Buaya is everywhere. All Indonesians have detected something wrong with the determination of the suspect from the KPK leadership. The public saw that there was a form of legal engineering effort being carried out to weaken the KPK.

Chandra and Bibit did not remain silent. They then made a request for a judicial review of the KPK Law regarding its dismissal deemed legally flawed to the Constitutional Court (MK). The wish was welcomed by the Chief Justice of the Constitutional Court, Mahfud MD.

Mahfud's acceptance reasoned. He had already researched the Cicak-Buaya problem. Mahfud thought that the case had potential for the weakening of the KPK. He voiced the narrative to President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono in July 2009. As a result, when Chandra and Bibit applied he accepted it.

Mahfud and other Constitutional Court judges were challenged to solve the problem. Chandra and Bibit also moved to provide evidence of the results of the KPK wiretapping related to Susno's problem. Mahfud gave the opportunity for the recording to be played in the Constitutional Court.

The results of the round became Mahfud's basis for dismantling legal engineering efforts. Mahfud also revealed that the screening of recordings of the results of the conversation at the Constitutional Court was nothing new. It has been done before. Everything is for the sake of judicial transparency.

The Constitutional Court's decision to open the recordings of corruptors and law enforcement officers in court. As a result, the Constitutional Court acquitted Chandra and Bibit of all charges in November 2009. Both are innocent. Mahfud has proven that there was a engineering that made them both removed from the KPK.

This determination made Mahfud have to bear the consequences. His life seemed to want to be criminalized according to Mahfud's own statement. His escort as ring one official was ignored because 12 guards from the police who were on duty resigned on a daily basis.

Mahfud also tried to tell about having no bodyguards to his friend Luhut Binsar Pandjaitan. Entrepreneurs who used to be high-ranking officials of the Indonesian Army Kopassus then sent two personal bodyguards to Mahfud.

After that, he asked the local Police Chief to apologize and immediately provide the escort as it should be. Mahfud did not receive an escort for a total of two days and was replaced by Luhut's personal bodyguard.

Responding to this, the Chairman of the Plenary Session of the Constitutional Court, Mahfud MD, smiled. According to him, there is no prohibition in any law when the Petitioner wants to file evidence at trial. Screening recordings in court is not the first time that has occurred in the Constitutional Court. When testing the Pornography Law, the Constitutional Court invites people to dance in the courtroom.

The KPK Law Article 32 was tested to be declared unconstitutional because it was argued that there were engineering efforts. When the Petitioner provided recorded evidence, the Constitutional Court accepted it as proof of the Petitioner. In addition, the Court explained that the reason for the screening was clear. "The spirit contained in the article is all good, but the good article can also be engineered to be not good. That will be assessed by the Constitutional Court", said Fery Amsari and RNB Aji in a Constitutional magazine report entitled KPK Leadership Can't Be Stopped Without Court Decision (2009).