The Council Corruption Eradication Commission No Longer Issues Licenses For Wiretaps, Searches, And Confiscations

Illustrated (Irfan Meidianto / VOI)

JAKARTA - Chairman of the Supervisory Board of the Corruption Eradication Commission, Tumpak Hatorangan Panggabean, stated that his party would no longer issue wiretapping, search, and confiscation permits.

This is in line with the decision of the Constitutional Court which states that KPK wiretaps, searches, and confiscations do not need to ask permission from the supervisory board as stipulated in Law Number 19 of 2019. The anti-graft commission does not need permission but it is sufficient to provide the notification.

"We must respect the Constitutional Court's decision which has since been pronounced into effect. Starting this afternoon onwards, the supervisory board will not issue any more tapping, search and seizure permits", Tumpak told reporters, Wednesday, May 5.

He hopes that the implementation of the three activities that are the main thing in investigating this corruption case will continue to run well.

"Regarding whether the Corruption Eradication Commission will become stronger with the revocation of the permit, of course, we will see in its implementation in the future, we hope that it will certainly be better", he said.

Furthermore, although the supervisory board no longer issues permits for these three activities, other tasks that must be carried out will be carried out effectively.

In the Corruption Eradication Commission Law Number 19 of 2019, it is stated that there are several tasks and authorities of the Supervisory Board of the Corruption Eradication Commission, namely:

1. Oversee the implementation of the duties and powers of the Corruption Eradication Commission;

2. Giving permission or not permitting wiretapping, search, and/or confiscation;

3. Compile and stipulate a code of ethics for the Head and Employees of the Corruption Eradication Commission;

4. Receiving and following up reports from the public regarding suspected violations of the code of ethics by the Head and Employees of the Corruption Eradication Commission or violations of the provisions of this Law;

5. Holding hearings to examine any suspected violation of the code of ethics by the Head and Employees of the Corruption Eradication Commission; and

6. Evaluating the performance of the Corruption Eradication Commission Leaders and Employees regularly once a year.

Previously reported, the Constitutional Court rejected the request for a judicial review of Law Number 19 of 2019 concerning the Corruption Eradication Commission. The judicial review of the Corruption Eradication Commission Law was proposed by former the Corruption Eradication Commission Commissioners Agus Rahardjo, Laode M. Syarif, and Saut Situmorang, as well as several other people.

They submitted a formal judicial review, namely testing the process of establishing law. Broadly speaking, three points are not in line with the requirements for the formation of laws in the Corruption Eradication Commission Law.

First, the deliberation process was carried out in a hurry, the Law did not enter the National Legislation Program but suddenly appeared. Second, the discussion does not involve public consultation.

In fact, the inventory list of legal problems was not shown to the Corruption Eradication Commission as the main stakeholder. Third, about academic papers that have never been shown to the public.

"The verdict is to judge in proviso rejecting the petitioners' petition for provisions, in essence, the petition rejects the petitioners entirely", said Chief Justice of the Constitutional Court Anwar Usman at the Constitutional Court Building while tapping the hammer, Tuesday, May 4.

The panel of judges thinks that the petitioners' petition is legally groundless in its entirety. Then, the Constitutional Court Judge Wahiddudin Adams had a dissenting opinion regarding the formal petition for judicial review of the Corruption Eradication Commission Law.