The voice Indonesian News - Almost did not have the person who did not know Antasari Azhar. The noose that initially is doubted by his commitment in the eradication of this corruption, currently became the eradication icon of corruption in Indonesia. When nominating himself as headed by the Pemberantasan Commission of Corruption (KPK), various rumours were connected with himself. From the case of Tommy Soeharto, Regent Konawane, Regent Muna, to giving of money to a reporter. "There was the friend suggested the jolt then." All that untrue, all terdokumentasi, said Antasari. Antasari did not follow his friend's suggestion to send the lawsuit. He chose answered by other means: worked. Below kepemimpina him, KPK exposed corruption in agencies that had not been touched the law. From BI, the People's Representative Council, to the Agung Attorney General's Office that was the Antasari corps personally. Together with praise and hope to KPK, many frightened sides and began to question the KPK authority that was too big, like the tapping.Along with his interview extract:
How your change from the Agung Attorney General's Office to KPK? Not had the change in the matter of law enforcement. Although having the change, previously there I not the first person, now first. There were two most prominent matters. Firstly, in KPK we more could meng-create in carrying out the task. The policy could be more arranged must how, for example to have to be fast the resolution. That was second, in KPK I felt I found the identity. Because, all of them very might not. So, we must place ourselves truly. Here will become the focus, because we were highlighted by us must take care to do it was said, not be "Cooked the upholder's noose" of the "law like gitu."
This means that in the place of the task that previously often might him?
Yes should be not interpreted like that. If the handling of the case not was that the difference. Previously nerima parcel normally because of not yet having the rule. The person came to ask for help many, but not had been followed by me. Don't very much-time came to me to change the principle, this of A helped was changed by B.
Since you were Chairman KPK became more limiting himself?
Yes, for example to meet the person, lest meeting the person tomorrow him became problematic. I have twice met like that. Had had the regent in Sumatra, at that time the photograph in a crowd continued in-croping berdua, entered the newspaper. I now for example to come to kawinan, the handshake at once came home. Previously often came home from work waited stalled drank where now could not again. In KPK the person also not at random could enter met headed by KPK.
As the public prosecutor, how did you place yourself in the Urip case that also dragged senior figures Kejagung?
I often met people of the attorney general's office, several times the talk there. The public prosecutor will be 7 thousand. That had problems like Urip yes only Urip personally. Not all like Urip, still many that were good. So, yes did not have the problem.
Since the case of Urip-Artatyta stuck up, once you met Packed Neatly Yahya (former Deputy Attorney General for Special Crimes)?
Had met very much In A Orderly Manner my brother's time died. He came, condolence calls. Not is uneasy, normally
Why could corruption happen in the Attorney General's Office institution, the People's Representative Council and BI?
Firstly, because of not having the strength himself in the behaviour. There was no defence himself. It should be that had the conviction that not the right to be forbidden, disturbed the person might not. Secondly, because of the system. Must have the change, the arrangement, to reduce the corruption opportunity. For example, how so that the litigating person has difficulty meeting the person who handled the case. Must be prepared the window, computerisation, lest the litigating person met the public prosecutor and police. With the system was pacified by us the official. The public prosecutor was in their office visited by the litigating person, was thought by me not had the wildness Public Prosecutor in the markets nawarin the case. So, safe.
Many that believed imprisonment was too light for the hoodlum. How your opinion about social sanctions for the hoodlum?
Was difficult to speak sanctions because tight his connection with human rights. The death sentence, for example, was said was compatible with HAM. Kemarin resistance clothes were also said against, in fact that resistance clothes, not the hoodlum's clothes. I precisely had thinking if for example the hoodlum who was sentenced was lost civil rights. For example, to Be Director Bank not could again. The difficulty later it was said will violate human rights again. Because, he said the person would not forever was ugly. Was difficult if we were too permissive.
You were interested in entering to the world of politics?
No, I knew myself, I did not yet deserve to be the President or the Vice President. The main thing is I want to in the scope of the upholder of the law. I was entrusted up until 2011. Now I although progressed first in law enforcement. Increasingly we touched something, increasingly we saw many problems that must be straightened out by us.
But, you will be so popular at this time?
I this just 20 to 30 percent took a step. Many that still must be repaired. The eradication of corruption in the procurement of new goods and services in the surface. We did not yet touch the problem of nature resources, business administration, agencies that were touching with the interests of the community like the insurance, manpower, the transport management of the public for the community. So, let I worked more previously. The source: the National Journal, on September 10 2008
Tidak ada komentar:
Posting Komentar