Kaesang with his wife Erina during a campaign rally for the 2024 general election in Malang, East Java on Feb 1, 2024. — The Jakarta Post/Asia News Network
INDONESIA’S Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK) announced recently that the use of a private jet by Kaesang Pangarep, son of former president Joko “Jokowi” Widodo, during his trip to the United States in August does not constitute graft. The KPK justified this decision by noting that Kaesang is not a non-state official.
The investigation began when Kaesang and wife Erina Gudono used the private jet owned by an entrepreneur linked to a business partnership with Gibran Rakabuming, Kaesang’s older brother and Indonesia’s current Vice-President, from his time as the Surakarta mayor in Central Java.
Posting that launched the scandal: Photo out of the airplane window showing the wing uploaded by Erina on Instagram Story @erinagudono on Aug 21. — Instagram screen capture
The decision has met with considerable public criticism. Many argue that, although Kaesang is not a government official, his close association with high-ranking officials should necessitate deeper scrutiny, especially considering how the luxurious lifestyles of officials’ families have exposed corruption in the past. This was evident in the notable case of Mario Dandy, whose extravagant lifestyle eventually led to the exposure of his tax officer father Rafael Alun Trisambodo’s illicit financial activities.
Comparing this with a similar case Singapore reveals a stark difference in accountability. Former Singaporean Transportation Minister S. Iswaran, faces a 12-month prison sentence for using a private jet for personal travel. This strict response demonstrates Singapore’s zero-tolerance stance on graft and its commitment to integrity in public service.
This case highlights the challenges associated with politically exposed persons (PEPs), a term referring to individuals in prominent public roles and their close associates, as defined by a 2020 Harvard University study.
Indonesia’s anticorruption laws, particularly Article 3 of Law No. 31/1999 on corruption eradication, and Articles 603 and 604 of the Criminal Code, explicitly criminalise the misuse of authority for personal or familial gain. These provisions aim to prevent PEPs from leveraging their influence for undue benefits, yet cases continue to surface.
Under these laws, Kaesang would technically be considered a PEP due to his family’s political prominence, and his actions should, therefore, warrant heightened scrutiny. PEPs wield substantial power and influence, which can facilitate access to government contracts, resources, and policy decisions, creating ample opportunities for conflicts of interest if left unchecked.
Despite such strict legal instruments, graft remains pervasive in Indonesia, deeply rooted in daily life. The potential for conflicts of interest is heightened when PEPs prioritise personal or familial interests over the public good, undermining trust in government institutions.
The latest data from the KPK reported that in 2024, of 93 cases, 37 involved PEPs, making them the highest implicated group in graft cases. This resulted in estimated state financial losses of 5.2 trillion Indonesian rupiah (RM1.46mil), with only 296.5 million Indonesian rupiah (RM83,130) recovered.
Clearly, this is an issue that is urgently in need of resolution. Leniency in sentencing is a major contributing factor. For example, Djoko Dwijono, former president director of PT Jasamarga Jalan Layang Cikampek received a mere three-year prison sentence and a 250mil Indonesian rupiah (RM70,328) fine despite causing 510bil Indonesian rupiah (RM142,800) in state losses.
Such leniency fails to provide an effective deterrent, making punishment seem more symbolic than substantive. Indonesia’s weak whistleblower protection system exacerbates this problem.
Whistleblowers in Indonesia often face threats, retaliation, and even criminalisation, deterring many from coming forward. The absence of a clear, enforceable framework for protecting whistleblowers’ rights leaves them vulnerable, creating an environment where silence is often the safest option.
Additionally, a lack of effective public oversight compounds the issue. State officials’ wealth reports are intended to provide transparency, yet their self-reporting nature and lack of thorough verification allow PEPs to misrepresent their assets. This was exemplified by Rafael’s case, where his reported assets fell far short of his actual wealth.
To address the issue of graft among PEPs, several measures should be prioritised. First, compliance from the top down must be strengthened. Effective compliance begins with leadership. President Prabowo Subianto noted, “To eradicate graft, we must first clean up from the top”.
Leaders should model integrity and undergo rigorous ethics training, setting a standard that cascades down through their organisations, fostering a culture of accountability.
Second, enhance whistleblower protections. Implementing comprehensive whistleblower protections, including physical and psychological safety measures and benefits for their families, would empower individuals to report corruption without fear of reprisal.
Third, leverage the PEPs database. The Financial Transaction Analysis Reporting Centre has already launched a PEP database. By collaborating with global databases and private entities, Indonesia can gain real-time insights into PEP transactions, enabling more proactive monitoring of potential graft activities.
To truly address graft, the new administration’s first 100 days should prioritise effective anti-corruption measures, especially among PEPs. Equally important is the role of citizens in holding leaders accountable.
A mental revolution among the PEPs should also take place, creating a more transparent and integrated government. With a new administration now in office, there is a heightened public expectation for innovative and bold steps to tackle graft comprehensively.
The government must adopt a courageous and more effective approach to prevent and eradicate corruption among PEPs and set a more robust standard for ethical governance in Indonesia. — The Jakarta Post/Asia News Network
Ahmad Novindri Aji Sukma is a PhD researcher at the University of Cambridge, specialising in Criminology. Krisnady Kesumadiksa is a legal researcher from Gadjah Mada University, Yogyakarta.
