Category Archives: corruption

January 21, 2011 · 16:17

Updates from the region

A few interesting developments from the region:

Burma: An opposition candidate won a case against a candidate backed by the military regime! According to DVB, the Election Commission dismissed a complaint by a Union Solidarity and Development Party (USDP) candidate that his opponent, Sai Moon from the Shan Nationalities Democratic Party (SNDP), used armed groups to force people to vote for him. This is one of a handful of cases in which the courts have ruled against an elite figure. Even more interesting, according to the article other opposition candidates claim the Commission is handling such cases fairly. That’s certainly a rare bit of good news and hopefully a reason for hope that the country’s new judicial institutions will provide better services than they have since 1962.


Indonesia: No surprise that the latest news deals with corruption scandals. First, a while ago I blogged about the Gayus corruption case, in which a tax official bribed jailers to let him leave jail and vacation in, among other places, Bali. Now, the South Jakarta District Court has handed down a sentence. Seven years and a Rp. 300 million ($33,170) fine. However, according to The Jakarta Globe, many see this as too light a sentence for such flagrant abuses. 


I have no basis upon which to judge these criticisms. I don’t know if the court was particularly lenient on Gayus or if any foul play was involved. Regardless, the outcry is a useful reminder of the distinction between justice in the abstract and the judicial process. It may well be that the masses demand a more stringent punishment than the system provides.


In another corruption case, judges visited the home of former National Police chief Susno Duadji to investigate claims that a broker visited the home in December 2008 to pay him Rp. 500 million ($55,000). This event is interesting from a comparative law standpoint. In civil law countries like Indonesia, judges can and often do take it upon themselves to investigate or confirm factual allegations by the parties. In common law systems, judges almost never leave the courtroom and rely solely upon the testimony of witnesses. Still, the article doesn’t explain how visiting a house will reveal what happened over two years ago.


Philippines: The war of words between the Aquino administration and the Supreme Court took another turn as Chief Justice Corona denounced a “propaganda war” against the Court’s recent judgements. According to PhilStar, the chief justice claimed, “There are people who went out of their way to disparage the decisions of the SC.” He particularly criticized those who attacked the judgments without actually reading them. Nonetheless, he was careful to clarify that the “propaganda war” attacked the judgments, not the justices themselves. Hopefully, everybody in the Philippines can keep that distinction in mind because it looks like the tensions between the court and presidency will remain for some time to come.

Comments Off on Updates from the region

Filed under Burma, corruption, elections, indonesia, Myanmar, Philippines

January 6, 2011 · 00:42

India’s judiciary – no longer a model?

While I’ve often bemoaned the fact that most comparative constitutional law research focuses on Western countries, India does receive quite a lot of attention from scholars, mostly due to the Indian Supreme Court’s notorious activism and progressive interpretations of constitutional law. However, as my former Prof. Armin Rosencranz alleges in Environmental Law and Policy in India/Cases, Materials and Status, sometimes this activism pushes the court into policy decisions best left to the bureaucracy. Still, it has become a leader in progressive jurisprudence and a symbol that strong courts can exist and even thrive in a developing country.

Unfortunately, a recent article in Asia Times suggests India’s judiciary is not only as riddled with corruption as any in the developing world, but also that the problem has gotten worse. Prashant Bhushan, a lawyer with the Campaign for Judicial Accountability and Judicial Reform (CJAR), faces contempt charges for suggesting several justices are corrupt. Meanwhile, former Chief Justice K. G. Balakrishnan is facing criticism for refusing to require judges to disclose assets and bring the courts under the Right to Information Act.

While the article recounts other allegations of corruption, it is worth noting to things. First, the article gives the impression that corruption has increased since the early 1990s. I don’t know India well enough to speculate as to why this might be true, except perhaps to say that economic growth might have led to an increase in rent-seeking activities and opportunities for bribery.

Second, the incidents all seem to involve overbearing efforts by the Supreme Court to protect the judiciary’s reputation and privacy (e.g., contempt charges, Right to Information Act, disclosure of assets) as to any cases of overt bribery. This reminds me of  Filipina journalist Marites Vitug’s depiction of the Philippine Supreme Court in Shadow of Doubt. This raises the question as to whether and to what extent judiciaries should be subject to the same intensive public scrutiny as other branches of government. A court’s only weapon is its reputation, so is free speech that permits unsubstantiated allegations of corruption more harmful when impugning a judge than a president?

Of course, this is not to deny that some cases of secrecy are simply intended to shield corrupt judges. But the issue bears further thought, especially when the U.S. Supreme Court refuses to allow television coverage of oral arguments.

Comments Off on India’s judiciary – no longer a model?

Filed under corruption, India

November 18, 2010 · 06:01

Just when you thought corruption in Indonesia couldn’t get worse

According to The Jakarta Post, Gayus Tambunan, a former tax official now on trial for corruption, allegedly bribed his way out of jail to vacation in Bali. Oddly enough, Gayus was photographed at a tennis game disguised with a wig. Needless to say, this has only further undermined Indonesians’ confidence in their legal system. I won’t dwell on this case too much except to say I’m not sure whether I should laugh or cry…

Comments Off on Just when you thought corruption in Indonesia couldn’t get worse

Filed under corruption, indonesia

July 28, 2010 · 13:40

It’s tough being a poor criminal

I’ve blogged a bit about Indonesia’s judicial mafia (although admittedly I haven’t given it the attention it deserves). That’s why I thought I’d at least link to and comment on this new Asia Sentinel article about the “judicial mafia.”

The article starts by contrasting the case of Ms. Siti Hasana, who stole $100 worth of hairdryers and beauty creams, with rich defendants who are able to bribe judges. She then complains that she couldn’t afford bail and he prosecutors insisted on going to trial.

To me, this seems like a distinctly unsympathetic case. Siti claimed she only stole because she was poor, but beauty products! Really? The article seems to be attempting to criticize Indonesia’s justice system, but through the lens of a perfectly normal prosecution. This is an important problem in the study of foreign justice systems – just what is fair in criminal prosecutions? At one point do you claim that the system acted improperly with respect to a particular defendant?

Siti’s lawyer also makes some “interesting” claims with regard to judicial corruption:

Not only in this case, but in almost all cases, it is very hard to prove any corruption, but we can feel it. We can smell indications of corruption. In this case I would say there are indications the owner of the shop may have bribed the prosecutors, but I can’t prove that.

I don’t doubt that corruption riddles the court, but this type of argument by innuendo does nothing but tarnish the judiciary’s image. If anything, the statement sounds less like an analysis of Indonesian judicial reform than an attempt to mount a case for his client (after all, if the courts are corrupt, her guilty verdict can’t be fair, right?).

The articles discussion of the disparities between prison conditions is more substantive. The rich can obtain luxurious prisons (and usually early release), while the poor are locked in squalid dungeons. Here is an excerpt:

Tommy Suharto, the son of the former dictator, was found guilty of killing the judge who sentenced him to 18 months in jail for corruption. He received 15 years in jail, but only spent four of them in prison where he was served by personal staff in a comfortable room. 

Danang Widoyoko, the coordinator of Indonesian Corruption Watch, says that stories of inmates living very comfortably in prison are all too common.

“There is a joke in Indonesia that you can buy everything in prison except a car and get everything except your freedom. If you have money you can buy everything. You can decorate your cell, or choose which room you want. If you want air-conditioning or free access for your family – that is actually offered by prison guards. Of course bribery is involved and there is still no policy to address this situation,” he said.

Overall, it’s important to remember that, while judicial corruption is real and extremely damaging, not all claims of judicial corruption should be treated equally. If anything, politicians and litigants all might allegations of judicial corruption to advance their own goals.

Comments Off on It’s tough being a poor criminal

Filed under corruption, indonesia

November 27, 2009 · 04:25

Of Geckos and Crocodiles

When the Washington, D.C., think-tank crowd gathers for an event on legal reform in Indonesia, you know a major scandal is brewing. At a CSIS event earlier this week, November 23 2009, Michael Buehler, of Columbia University’s Weatherhead East Asian Institute, discussed the ongoing controversy surrounding Indonesia’s Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK). Appropriately titled Of Geckos and Crocodiles,” the talk discussed the KPK (nicknamed the geckos), and its failure to root out vested interests in the police and judiciary (the crocodiles).
Buehler began his talk with a tour de force of Indonesia’s current anti-corruption legal framework. He later discussed the institutional capacity of Indonesia’s legal institutions, particularly the KPK. As of 2009, the KPK has a staff of 400 and a budget of $22 million – an obvious improvement over the Suharto era, but miniscule compared to its counterparts in Hong Kong and Singapore. According to Buehler’s data, the the KPK Corruption Court (TIPIKOR) handled over 30% of all corruption cases in the country. Impressively, it has a 100% conviction rate against defendants, versus less than 40% in the regular judiciary. However, most of those officials convicted in the TIPIKOR have been lower-level officials rather than the “big fish.”

Unfortunately, the SBY administration watered down the legal basis for the KPK and TIPIKOR in the Corruption Court Law of 2009. Previously, TIPIKOR judge panels consisted of a mix of ad hoc and career judges. The former were seen as more independent than the latter, who often must please superiors to receive promotions. However, the new law would replace the ad hoc judges entirely with career judges. Furthermore, the district court chief judge can alter a panel of TIPIKOR judges at will, even further weakening their independence. The law also establishes a branch of the TIPIKOR in all 33 provinces, but some critics allege that this would simply stretch the KPK’s already limited resources too thin.

Buehler made an interesting point about the “legal mafia.” According to a study he recently conducted, Indonesian conglomerates pay tuition for law students and recruit them to serve in the judicial service. Then, when they graduate, the conglomerate knows it has a network of loyal judges throughout the district courts. I am in the process of tracking down this report and will post comments as soon as possible.

The Istana Merdeka announced a policy that resembled traditional Javanese aloofness more than the vigorous activism legal reformers had hoped for. According to BBC, SBY has suggested the two KPK officials – Bibit Samad Rianto and Chandra Hamzah – should not face trial, but also resisted pressure to interfere directly in the case. SBY hinted that the scandal should be settled out of court, i.e. that nobody would face justice on corruption charges. Buehler criticized this as sending precisely the wrong message about corruption, and that’s certainly the image foreigners have taken away from this scandal.
While far from blameless, one thing that bothers me about all of these attacks on SBY is that they seem to ignore the finer points of Indonesian law. Any American lawyer knows that the president cannot simply intervene in an ongoing prosecution. Just imagine the outcry if President Bush had publicly condemned Patrick Fitzgerald’s prosecution of Scooter Libby for outing CIA agent Valerie Plame. As the Economist pointed out, it’s ironic that legal reformers are now criticizing SBY for refusing to take a similar action. As lawyers, we should be concerned with process as well as justice. Just because Bibit and Chandra are sympathetic figures on the side of righteousness, it wouldn’t make a good precedent for the president to take extra-constitutional steps to protect them. Unfortunately, this is not the first or last time legal reformers have urged foreign governments to take certain reforms without considering local context.

Note: if you haven’t been following the story, check out BBC’s Q&A about the scandal.

Comments Off on Of Geckos and Crocodiles

Filed under corruption, indonesia, KPK, Michael Buehler