The Jakarta Post
Please Update your browser
Your browser is out of date, and may not be compatible with our website. A list of the most popular web browsers can be found below.
Just click on the icons to get to the download page.
Popular Reads
Top Results
No results found. Please check your search term and try again
Can't find what you're looking for?
View all search results
Popular Reads
Top Results
No results found. Please check your search term and try again
Can't find what you're looking for?
View all search resultsGraft reform at a crossroads
Rewriting the anticorruption law could modernize enforcement to global standards, but without strict safeguards, it risks giving corrupt elites an easy exit under the guise of business judgment.
Change text size
Gift Premium Articles
to Anyone
Share the best of The Jakarta Post with friends, family, or colleagues. As a subscriber, you can gift 3 to 5 articles each month that anyone can read—no subscription needed!
The National Disaster Mitigation Agency (BNPB) official Gabriel Purwaka Sigit (left), Bima Setiawan (right) who is the younger brother of BNPB chief Suharyanto, and private-sector figure Syifa Nrika Ghifarian (second left) walk in detainee vests after questioning at the Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK) headquarters in Jakarta on Oct. 14, 2026. The KPK has detained five suspects in an alleged corruption case at BNPB, uncovered through a sting operation. (Antara/Fauzan)
T
he push to amend Anticorruption Law No. 20/2001 is back on the table, and it’s picking up a steam. Coordinating Law, Human Rights, Immigration and Corrections Minister Yusril Ihza Mahendra and National Economic Council (DEN) chief Luhut Pandjaitan are pitching the overhaul as a necessary step to bring the country’s legal framework up to international standards.
Their main argument centers on synchronizing domestic laws with the United Nations Convention Against Corruption (UNCAC), which Indonesia ratified two decades ago. In theory, this would tackle long-standing grey areas around what counts as "state financial losses", shield decision-makers in state-owned enterprises from arbitrary criminalization, and introduce critical tools to prosecute modern offenses like influence peddling and illicit enrichment.
Catching up with global norms makes sense on paper, but the government and the House of Representatives must tread very carefully. The public hasn't forgotten the 2019 revision of the Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK) Law, which was sold as a way to improve oversight but eventually defanged the agency by bogging investigators down in bureaucratic red tape and putting the institution under tighter executive control.
The legislature shenanigans still loom large as a warning. Since then, Indonesia’s Corruption Perceptions Index has stalled or slid backward, matching what everyday citizens see: pervasive graft across central and regional governments that, to many, feels reminiscent of the pre-Reformasi New Order era.
Much of the current unease centers on plans to reframe Articles 2 and 3 of the current law, the core provisions targeting unlawful enrichment and abuse of power that lead to state losses. Proponents claim narrowing the definition of state losses will prevent bureaucrats and corporate heads from running scared every time a legitimate policy carries commercial risk. But civil society groups see an obvious trap: soften those definitions without airtight safeguards, and you give corrupt elites an easy pass to disguise blatant graft as mere "business judgment".
This debate is especially relevant for bodies like Danantara, the state investment management agency, created in the shadow of several high-profile graft trials where SOE bosses were prosecuted simply for making business calls. Still, gutting the state loss provisions risks dismantling the bedrock of Indonesia's anti-graft enforcement.
Bringing our laws into line with UNCAC also can’t just be a cherry-picking exercise. Full compliance requires going after private-sector bribery, penalizing the bribery of foreign officials, outlawing trading in influence, and legally targeting unexplained wealth, loopholes that Indonesian prosecutors have spent years struggling to close. After all, corruption today rarely looks like someone quietly pocketing cash from an office safe; it involves cross-border trade misinvoicing, mineral smuggling rings and intricate money-laundering schemes designed to drain public funds out of sight.
