Jakarta, wahidinstitute.org
As many as 30 religious experts from Islam, Protestantism, Catholicism, Hinduism, Buddhism and Confucianism were given various materials concerning corruption and the court specifically aimed at dealing with corruption cases, otherwise known as the Corruption Court.

They participated in the Workshop entitled Religious Experts Discuss Corruption Court Bill, at Hotel Santika, Jakarta. It was run by the WAHID Institute and the Friendship Institute, from Sunday to Tuesday (October 19-21, 2008).

Speakers included KH Masdar F Mas’udi (Head of PBNU), KH A Malik Madany (Senior Lecturer at UIN Sunan Kalijaga Yogyakarta) and anti-corruption activists such as Bambang Widjayanto and Teten Masduki.

In their speeches, Masdar and Malik spoke more about the religious theories concerning the prohibition of corruption. They believed corruptors had violated religion and morals. The only issue was, Masdar said, that Islamic law had no specific term for corruption, and thus it is not easy to find an appropriate punishment for corruptors. He feels it is better that corruption be included within the theft category, which can carry quite heavy sentences.

In addition, Malik said, there was no specific theory proscribing corruption. For instance, there is no verse that says wa yahrumu al-korupsi(corruption is forbidden). Because of this, punishment is unclear and debatable. Malik said that Nahdlatul Ulama (NU) once released a decree stating that deceased corruptors not be prayed for. This is quite a severe form of social punishment or sentencing.

“This does not mean that the corpses of deceased corruptors not be prayed for at all. It means kyai or religious leaders need not pray for them, their family’s prayers are enough. Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) held a similar belief, shown when one of his friends died hiding loot he had taken in war to the sum of 2 dirham. The Prophet did not want to pray for him, only his family did,” Malik told.

Meanwhile, Bambang Widjayanto spoke to the many urgent issues involving the Corruption Court Bill. He felt that if parliament did not pass the bill as soon as possible it would destroy the corruption eradication movement in Indonesia. The only corruption court possible is this specifically court. “In common courts almost all corruptors are let free. But the Corruption Court has ruled guilty every single corruptor tried,” he said.

As a result, he hopes that religious experts help urge parliament to stop delaying passing the bill. Further, he pointed out, corruptors who feel threatened are trying to oppose the bill, so that it is not passed. Because of this the bill has become an object of competition between corruptors and anti-corruption activists.

Teten Masduki chose to talk more about the complicated modus operandi of corruptors. For instance, Teten said, the common practice now was for corruptors to take hundreds of trillions of rupiah from regional budgets for use in the financial market. They then receive trillions of rupiah in interest, and return the original money to the regional treasury. At a glance, there is no money missing from regional treasuries. However such behaviour must not be endorsed, as public money may not be used to meet private interests. “This is what’s happening at the moment,” Teten said.

On the workshop’s third day these religious experts made an important decision to demand that the Indonesian parliament (DPR RI) immediately legalize or pass the Corruption Court Bill before December 19, 2009, this date being the three year cut off since the original Constitutional Court’s ruling.

In more detail, the decision is as follows: First, parliament must seriously discuss and legalize the Corruption Court Bill. In order to guarantee law enforcement particularly against corruption, parliament must not make this bill an object of political trading or bargaining in relation to the 2009 general elections. Parliament needs to reinforce its stance as one element in the movement aga inst corruption.

Second, parliament needs to ensure that this bill can be passed before the 2004-2009 parliament term ends. This is vital because if its legalization keeps being extended, it not only opens up opportunities for political trading, but also raises doubts about the fate of corruption eradication. Having said this, legalization of the bill must guarantee that the Corruption Court Bill is truly progressive in its intentions to eradicate corruption.

Third, all elements of society are asked to support and push parliament to immediately discuss and pass the Corruption Court Bill. Society needs to consider not reelecting parliament member candidates if they fail in legalizing the Corruption Court Bill before the 2009 elections.

However, as religious experts, the members of the workshop were aware that they could only fight from a cultural perspective by promoting religion as the spirit of corruption eradication.

“Of course religion has its limits, because it can only give moral guidance. This guidance makes serious corruption eradication efforts possible, and also makes society aware that corruption is their common enemy,” said KH Saifuddin Zuhri, head of Salatiga MUI, as one of the spokespeople reading out the declaration.

As a nation known for its religiosity, Saifuddin continued, Indonesian society must present itself as a anti-corruption powerbase, and not as a place for corruptors.