Just a day after receiving a sentence reduction, Aulia Pohan, the father-in-law of President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono’s eldest son, quietly walked out of prison this week, raising questions about the government’s commitment to be tough on corrupt officials.
Justice and Human Rights Minister Patrialis Akbar confirmed on Friday that the former Bank Indonesia deputy governor was released on Wednesday, a day after receiving a six-month remission on his three-year jail term. He was one of 53,000 convicts nationwide who received sentence remissions on Independence Day.
Aulia and three other BI officials were each sentenced in June 2009 to four and half years in jail for their roles in the embezzlement of Rp 100 billion ($11.1 million) from a central bank foundation in 2003. The sentences were cut to three years after an appeal to the Supreme Court in March.
Patrialis said the other three — Maman Sumantri, Bunbunan Hutapea and Aslim Tadjuddin — were also paroled. “They all served two-thirds of their sentences,” he said. The four had been in prison for over 20 months, as they were first taken into custody in November 2008.
Topo Santoso, a legal analyst from University of Indonesia, said that by releasing corrupt officials, the government had failed to live up to its promises of zero tolerance for graft. “It is about sensitivity. We can only guess the reasoning behind the parole. A lot of convicts who aren’t as well connected have been denied time and again despite the fact that they too are eligible for parole,” he said.
Eryanto Nugroho, executive director of the Center for Law and Policy Studies, a judiciary watchdog, said the early release “betrays the people’s sense of justice. It shows that the government’s commitment toward eradicating corruption is merely lip service.”
Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK) Deputy Haryono Umar demanded revisions to regulations on remissions and pardons. “The government needs to evaluate the effectiveness of its regulations concerning corruption in the country,” he said. “Part of the function of the penal and law-enforcement systems is to deter crime and curb repeat offenders. I don’t see that happening if these conditions continue.”
Martin Hutabarat, a lawmaker from the opposition Great Indonesia Movement party (Gerindra), said any leniency shown to corruption convicts was intolerable, given the effect of their actions on the public.
“To be fair, besides being sent to prison, there must be a new mechanism to seize the wealth of those who commit corruption and put it in the state treasury,” Martin said.
Other lawmakers were more forgiving. Gayus Lumbuun, from the opposition Indonesian Democratic Party of Struggle (PDI-P), hesitated to criticize the decision. “Let the people decide whether the remission is in line with the government’s anticorruption program and whether the president has done his job properly,” he said.
Deputy House Speaker Priyo Budi Santoso, from the Golkar Party, was surprised to hear of Aulia’s parole, but urged the public to view the decision positively.
“Maybe we feel that their time in prison was very short, but it still means that they have served the punishment,” Priyo said. “If the Minister of Justice and Human Rights approved the decision, then it’s legitimate.”
Aulia and three other BI officials were each sentenced in June 2009 to four and half years in jail for their roles in the embezzlement of Rp 100 billion ($11.1 million) from a central bank foundation in 2003. The sentences were cut to three years after an appeal to the Supreme Court in March.
Patrialis said the other three — Maman Sumantri, Bunbunan Hutapea and Aslim Tadjuddin — were also paroled. “They all served two-thirds of their sentences,” he said. The four had been in prison for over 20 months, as they were first taken into custody in November 2008.
Topo Santoso, a legal analyst from University of Indonesia, said that by releasing corrupt officials, the government had failed to live up to its promises of zero tolerance for graft. “It is about sensitivity. We can only guess the reasoning behind the parole. A lot of convicts who aren’t as well connected have been denied time and again despite the fact that they too are eligible for parole,” he said.
Eryanto Nugroho, executive director of the Center for Law and Policy Studies, a judiciary watchdog, said the early release “betrays the people’s sense of justice. It shows that the government’s commitment toward eradicating corruption is merely lip service.”
Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK) Deputy Haryono Umar demanded revisions to regulations on remissions and pardons. “The government needs to evaluate the effectiveness of its regulations concerning corruption in the country,” he said. “Part of the function of the penal and law-enforcement systems is to deter crime and curb repeat offenders. I don’t see that happening if these conditions continue.”
Martin Hutabarat, a lawmaker from the opposition Great Indonesia Movement party (Gerindra), said any leniency shown to corruption convicts was intolerable, given the effect of their actions on the public.
“To be fair, besides being sent to prison, there must be a new mechanism to seize the wealth of those who commit corruption and put it in the state treasury,” Martin said.
Other lawmakers were more forgiving. Gayus Lumbuun, from the opposition Indonesian Democratic Party of Struggle (PDI-P), hesitated to criticize the decision. “Let the people decide whether the remission is in line with the government’s anticorruption program and whether the president has done his job properly,” he said.
Deputy House Speaker Priyo Budi Santoso, from the Golkar Party, was surprised to hear of Aulia’s parole, but urged the public to view the decision positively.
“Maybe we feel that their time in prison was very short, but it still means that they have served the punishment,” Priyo said. “If the Minister of Justice and Human Rights approved the decision, then it’s legitimate.”
