Jakarta. President Prabowo Subianto’s recent remarks about his plan to pardon corruption convicts were intended to shift the focus toward asset recovery as a central strategy in Indonesia’s fight against corruption, a senior minister has said.

Yusril Ihza Mahendra, the coordinating minister for legal, human rights, and correctional affairs, explained in an exclusive interview with BTV that Indonesia’s legal system should prioritize recovering stolen state assets rather than focusing solely on punishing corruption convicts. He argued that the current approach has not effectively curbed rampant corruption, which continues to plague the nation.

“The president’s remarks carry a goodwill gesture. The most important thing is asset recovery -- returning the state assets they have stolen. That’s the primary message,” Yusril said during the interview aired on Friday.

Worsening Corruption Index
Yusril highlighted Indonesia’s declining performance in global corruption rankings, emphasizing the need for a fresh approach. According to Transparency International’s 2022 Corruption Perceptions Index (CPI), Indonesia scored 34 out of 100, ranking 110th out of 180 countries. In comparison, neighboring Malaysia scored 47 (ranked 61st), and Singapore, known for its strong anti-corruption policies, scored 83 (ranked 5th).

“Indonesia’s corruption index keeps worsening. After decades of focusing on punitive measures, it’s evident that we need a new approach to tackle this enduring issue,” Yusril said.

Yusril, who has served as justice minister under several presidents, argued that Indonesia’s ratification of the UN Convention Against Corruption in 2006 should have led to anti-corruption laws emphasizing prevention and asset recovery rather than relying primarily on punishment.

“Our anti-corruption laws should emphasize asset recovery and prevention, not just deterrent effects or punishment,” he said.

He also underscored that the president’s authority to pardon convicts or suspects is enshrined in Article 14 of the 1945 Constitution. Historical precedents include President Bacharuddin Yusuf Habibie’s pardoning of political prisoners and President Abdurrahman Wahid’s decision to pardon members of the Free Aceh Movement.

Criticism and Legal Interpretation
Critics argue that Indonesia’s anti-corruption laws stipulate that returning stolen assets does not annul the criminal liability of graft convicts. Yusril acknowledged these concerns but clarified that the president’s constitutional authority to grant pardons supersedes statutory laws.

“What Prabowo meant was to encourage graft convicts and suspects to show remorse by returning the stolen assets before they can qualify for a presidential pardon,” Yusril explained.

During Megawati Soekarnoputri’s presidency, corruption was classified as an “extraordinary crime” alongside terrorism and drug trafficking. This led to the establishment of the Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK), which has since been empowered to investigate, arrest, and prosecute corruption cases. Additionally, prosecutors in Indonesia have the authority to initiate corruption investigations independently of the police.

“Despite having the police, prosecutors, and the KPK working against corruption, we have not succeeded in eradicating it. This is why we need a new approach,” Yusril said.