The Prohibition Of Meeting Case Parties Considered Criminalization Of KPK Personnel Is The Reason Alexander Tests Materials To The Constitutional Court

Deputy Chairman of the KPK Alexander Marwata at a press conference at the KPK's Red and White Building, South Jakarta, Tuesday, March 19. (Tsa Tsia-VOI)

JAKARTA - Deputy Chairman of the Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK) Alexander Marwata said Articles 36 and 37 of the KPK Law Number 19 of 2019 were vulnerable to being a means of criminalization. This reason made him submit a judicial review to the Constitutional Court (MK).

Article 36 states that KPK leaders are prohibited from having direct or indirect relationships with suspects or other parties who are related to criminal acts of corruption handled by the KPK for any reason.

Meanwhile, Article 37 also mentions the same prohibition. However, it is intended for KPK employees.

"This article for us can be used as a tool to criminalize the leadership and employees of the KPK," Alexander told reporters in a written statement quoted on Friday, November 8.

Alexander called the formulation of this article unclear. As a result, a different interpretation appears from the formula of the law.

"If the suspect is clear, the case is already at the investigation stage and the suspect already exists. But who is the other party, what stage is the limit on the case? For whatever reason, what is the meaning," he explained.

"If there is no explanation, it could be the application as much as law enforcers want. Are public reports that have not even been investigated also considered cases," continued Alexander.

Furthermore, Alexander said that the lawmaker should explain in terms of what meetings or communications with litigants are prohibited. "For example, it has resulted in conflicts of interest or delays in handling corruption cases that are being handled by the KPK," he said.

"The essence of Articles 36 and 37 is there. To protect KPK personnel from conflicts of interest and disruption of handling corruption cases. If meetings or communication do not interfere with the integrity of KPK personnel and cases handled smoothly without disturbances or obstacles, is it appropriate to be subject to ethical sanctions, instead of being convicted?" he asked.

Alexander said that this material test was actually not only for himself who was litigating at the Polda Metro Jaya because he met the former Head of Yogyakarta Customs, Eko Darmanto. He called this submission for the needs of KPK personnel.

"There should be no slightest doubt in interpreting the article of law by law enforcement and law enforcement. In addition, so that there is equal treatment between law enforcers. The prohibition of meeting or communicating with litigants only applies to KPK personnel, but other law enforcement officers have no problem when their leadership meets the litigants. This is non-existent and discriminatory," concluded Alexander.