PETITA: Jurnal Kajian Ilmu Hukum dan Syariah Volume 8, Number 1, 2023
P-ISSN: 2502-8006 E-ISSN: 2549-8274 DOI: https://doi.org/10.22373/petita.v8i1.165
EFFORTS TO PREVENT BRIBERY AND GRATUITY IN LAND AGENCY
AGUS KASIYANTO
Narotama University Surabaya, East Java, Indonesia Email: [email protected]
SRI WAHYU JATMIKOWATI
Narotama University Surabaya, East Java, Indonesia Email: [email protected]
Abstract: Bribery can be interpreted as facilitating money for certain interests. Gratuity is a gift in a broad sense, including giving money, goods, rebates (discounts), commissions, interest-free loans, travel tickets, lodging facilities, tours, free medical treatment, and other facilities (within the country or abroad) using electronic or without electronic means). Bribery and gratuity occurred in the Land Agency, fo example the sting operation at the Sorong City Land Agency, is the tip of the iceberg, caused by many factors. Therefore, prevention efforts can be started from oneself. Building an Anti-Bribery Management System [ABMS] and the Gratuity Control Unit [GCU] at the Land Agency and the support from Notary/Land Deed Officials (Notaris-PPAT) who runs their business free from Bribery and Gratuity are another efforst. These efforts are expected to be able to create a Land Agency who serve the public with integrity and free from corruption.
Keywords: Bribery and Gratuity, Land Office Agency, Corruption Eradication Crime Abstrak: Suap diartikan secara lebih sederhana, yaitu uang pelicin atau alat sogok untuk kepentingan tertentu. Gratifikasi adalah pemberian dalam arti luas, meliputi pemberian uang, barang, rabat (diskon), komisi, pinjaman tanpa bunga, tiket perjalanan, fasilitas penginapan, perjalanan wisata, pengobatan cuma-cuma, dan fasilitas lainnya (baik yang diterima didalam negeri, maupun diluar negeri, dan baik yang dilakukan dengan menggunakan sarana elektronik atau tanpa sarana elektronik). Suap dan Gratifikasi yang tumbuh subur di Kantor Pertanahan, sebagaimana pernah terjadi Operasi Tangkap Tangan [OTT] di Kantor Pertanahan Kota Sorong merupakan puncak gunung es, yang disebabkan banyak faktor, oleh karena itu upaya pencegahannya bisa dimulai dari diri sendiri, membangun Sistem Manajemen Anti Penyuapan [SMAP] pada Kantor Pertanahan, dan Unit Pengendaliann Gartifikasi [UPG] yang dibuat serta diterapkan pada internal Kantor Pertanahan, serta adanya dukungan dari Notaris-PPAT yang menjalankan bisnisnya secara bebas dari Suap dan Gratifikasi. Upaya tersebut kedepan diharapkan dapat mewujudkan Kantor Pertanahan yang berintegritas, bebas korupsi, dan melayani.
Kata Kunci:: Suap dan Gratifikasi, Badan Pertanahan, Tindak Pidana Korupsi Introduction
The Sorong Saber Pungli (Illegal Levy Eradication Task Force) conducted sting operation at the National Land Agency/Agrarian and Spatial Planning [BPN/ATR] of Sorong on April 3, 2018. The evidence confiscated was money, IDR 40,100,000.00 at the counter and IDR. 28,250,000.00 from a BCA ATM of “WM” [an account for saving tactical funds]
and IDR. 61,100,000.00 from the witness (“NNR”). The total money confiscated was IDR.
129,350,000.00 is a gift or a promise in the form of tactical funds from the Notary/Land Deed Officials (Notaris-PPAT) of Sorong. “WM” clarified that the officers who collected the illegal tactical funds were witness “WM”, “NNR” and “YL”, as instructed by the Head of BPN/
ATR, Sorong, “RFN”. The money collected by “NNR” was given to the defendant “SPIP”, later reported and given to “RFN”. It was then distributed by “SPIP” to all officials and staff in the Sorong BPN/ATR Office. “SPIP” was declared legally and convincingly proven to have committed the crime as charged in the second alternative indictment.1
Corruption originates from the Latin word „corruptio“, meaning damage or depravity and used to describe a bad condition or deed. In the Great Dictionary of Bahasa (KBBI), the origin of the word corruption is corrupt, meaning damaged, rotten, and can be bribed.
Corruption also means misappropriating or misusing state funds (companies) to gain personal or other people‘s benefits.2 Jeremy Pompe defined corruption as abusing power and trust for self-interest.3 Huntington (in Chaerudin) asserted that corruption is the behavior of public officers or employees that deviates from the norms accepted and practiced by society, aiming to benefit individuals.4 In addition, Romli Atmasasmita argued that corruption originates from power: “Corruption is also related to power since the ruler can abuse his power for personal, family and crony interests. 5 The Law Number 31 Year 1999, concerning Eradication of Criminal Acts of Corruption and its amendments, recognizes 8 Typologies of Corruption: 1) State Losses; 2) Bribery; 3) Embezzlement; 4) Extortion; 5) Fraudulent Acts; 7) Gratuity; and 8) other criminal acts. Bribery is regulated in Article 5, paragraph (1) letters a, b, paragraph (2); Article 6, paragraph (1) letters a, b, paragraph (2); Article 11; Article 12, letters a, b, c, d; Article 13. Gratuity is regulated in Article 12 B in conjunction with Article 12 C.6
Giving or receiving bribes is an act of corruption, which is the essence of corruption.
Farida Patittingi and Fajlurrahman Jurdi [2016] defined bribery as the payment (in money or the like) given or taken in a corrupt relationship. Bribes usually have a fixed amount and are subject to a certain percentage in the contract. As one of the crimes related to the position, Bribery can involve two elements: the bribe giver and the recipient.7”Gratuity” is a gift with a broad sense, including giving money, goods, discounts, commissions, interest- free loans, travel tickets, hotel facilities, traveling tours, free medical treatment, and other facilities. Gratuity also means taking or accepting things within the country or abroad using or without electronic media.
Gratuity means giving, which is neutral. A gift becomes gratuity and is considered a bribe if it is related to the position and is contrary to the recipients’ obligations or duties.
Bribery and gratuity handled by Law Enforcement Officials, especially those submitted to the Corruption Court, are not comparable to the perception of the occurrence of bribery and gratuity. Bribery and Gratuity handled by Law Enforcement Officials, especially those submitted to the Corruption Court, are not comparable to the magnitude of the perception of the occurrence of bribery and gratuity. The development of Corruption Crime cases
1 Putusan Nomor 9/PidSus-TPK/2019/PN Mnk [Berkekuatan Hukum Tetap].
2 Departemen Pendidikan Nasional, Kamus Besar Bahasa Indonesia (Gramedia 2011).
3 Jeremy Pompe, Strategi Memberantas Korupsi: Elemen Sistem Integritas Nasional (Yayasan Pustaka Obor Indonesia 2003), p. 2.
4 Chaerudin, Strategi Pencegahan Dan Penegakan Hukum Pidana Korupsi (Refika Aditama 2008), p. 2.
5 Romli Atmasasmita, Sekitar Masalah Korupsi, Aspek Nasional Dan Aspek International (Mandar Maju 2004), p. 1; Satria Unggul Wicaksana Prakasa, ‘Anti-Corruption Survivor, Academic Freedom, and The’ (2019) 4 Petita: Jurnal Kajian Ilmu Hukum dan Syariah 163.
6 Djaja Ermansjah, Tipologi Tindak Pidana Korupsi Di Indonesia (Mandar Maju 2010).
7 Farida Patittingi & Fajlurrahman, Korupsi Kekuasaan:Dilema Penegakan Hukum Diatas Hegemoni Oligarki (Rajawali Pers 2016), p. 107-108.
carried out by the Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK) shows varied numbers of Corruption Crimes as determined by existing laws and regulations. The corruption cases handled by the KPK since ist establishment to date are presented in Table 1.
Table 1
BRIBERY AND MONEY COLLECTION CASES HANDLED BY THE KPK [2004 to 2021].
YEAR CASES HANDLED BY THE KPK
BRIBERY ILLEGAL LEVY
2004 s.d. 2014 186 19
2015 38 1
2016 79 1
2017 93 0
2018 168 4
2019 119 1
2020 56 0
2021 51 0
TOTAL 791 26
Source: kpk.go.id accessed on June 30, 2022, at 02.05 WIB [processed].
The Civil Servants/state administrators have two options for gratuity offered: rejecting the Gratuity when given or reporting it. The benefits of rejecting or reporting it are as follows:8
1. Reporting Gratuity Releases Threats of Punishment Against the Recipients
The criminal threat in accepting gratuity, considered a bribe, is life imprisonment or a minimum of four years and a maximum of 20 years, and a fine of IDR. 200,000,000.00 up to IDR. 1,000,000,000.00. However, gratuity recipients can be free from punishment or criminal threats if they report it within a maximum of 30 working days from receiving the gratuity. The guarantee of acquittal by providing a gratuity report will make civil servants feel secured in carrying out their duties and functions.
2. Reporting Gratuity Resolves Conflicts of Interest
Reporting gratuity acceptance within a predetermined period can eliminate the risk of disrupting the independence, objectivity, and impartiality of Civil Servants/State Administrators in making decisions and carrying out future tasks related to the Giver’s interests.
3. Reporting Gratuity Reflects Individual Integrity
Reporting the gratuity acceptance by Civil Servants/State Administrators indicates integrity. The higher the level of integrity of a civil servant/state administrator, the higher the level of prudence and awareness in implementing the rejection or reporting of gratuity received.
4. Reporting Gratuity is self-assessment
When a civil servant/ State Administrators experiences gratuity, he or she can ask reflective questions to carry out a self-assessment. These questions will support civil servants/State Administrators determine whether the gratuity is prohibited. Several
8 KPK, Pedoman Pengendalian Gratifikasi (KPK 2015), p. 31-32.
examples of reflective questions (if the answer to one of the reflective questions is “Yes”, the gratuity should be rejected, or if forced to be accepted, the recipients should report it as soon as possible).
1) Does a rule or code of ethics prohibit such acceptance?
2) Are there any official activities carried out jointly with the giver?
3) Will the publication of the receipt make you feel embarrassed, or will the gift be carried out openly or secretly?
4) Is it reasonable to suspect that the giver provide gratuity because she/he thinks you have a position to decision-making, service, or licensing in the related agency 5) Is the value of the gratuity reasonable or not?
6) Do your moral values allow gratuity to be received?
Referring to this explanation, the researchers investigated efforts to prevent bribery and gratuity in the Land Agency?
Research Method
The research used normative legal research focusing on legal norms in statutory regulations as primary legal material because this research refers to a case approach. Therefore, this research applied a statute and conceptual approach based on secondary legal material.9 Discussion
1. Strengthening the Personal Integrity of Land Agency Employees
The recognized religions in Indonesia, including Islam, Hinduism, Buddhism, Catholicism, and Christianity, strictly prohibit bribery in daily life. Armed with religious beliefs and knowledge about the prohibition of accepting bribes and gratuities, Land Agency employees are expected to behave honestly, with dedication, and high integrity. If religious values have grown and reside in their heart, even without supervision, the employees will always reject all types of gratuity categorized as bribes.10
2. Eliminating the Causes of Bribery and Gratuity
Bribery and gratuity cannot be eradicated or reduced unless the causes are discovered.
The causes of bribery and gratuity, according to some experts, such as Mucsin argued that bribery and gratuity behavior is caused by the following:
(1) An intention from the individual;
(2) Opportunities arised due to poor systems; and
(3) Courage due to the the lack of a deterrent effect on perpetrators.11
Robert Klitgaard said that corruption and bribery behavior develop if employees have monopoly power over clients and authority to act, and when employee accountability to superiors is weak. It can be formulated that corruption is equal to monopoly plus discretion minus accountability.12 Society’s mindset that “making difficult business easier
9 Peter Mahmud Marzuki, Penelitian Hukum (6th edn, Kencana Prenada Media Group 2005).
10 KEMENAG dan KPK, Gratifikasi Dalam Perpektif Agama (KEMENAG dan KPK 2019); Nawir Yuslem,
‘Sharia Contextualisation To Establish the Indonesian Fiqh’ (2020) 5 Petita : Jurnal Kajian Ilmu Hukum dan Syariah; Ratno Lukito, ‘Shariah And The Politics Of Pluralism In Indonesia: Understanding State’s Rational Approach To Adat And Islamic Law’ (2019) Volume 4 Petita : Jurnal Kajian Ilmu Hukum dan Syariah.
11 Muchsin, Kekuasaan Kehakiman Yang Merdeka (Independence Judiciary) (UNTAG PRESS 2010).
12 Robert Klitgaard, Controlling Corruption (Yayasan Pustaka Obor Indonesia 2005), p. 99.
with money and easy business will be hard without money” remains valid today. Many Land Agency employees in Indonesia receive bribes and gratuity. This corrupt attitude negatively impacts community services. Meanwhile, the causes of corruption in Land Agencies include low-quality human resources, no budget ceiling for honorary workers, greed, opportunity, and abuse of authority. All lead to accepting bribes and gratuity from Notary/Land Deed Officials (Notaris-PPAT).
According to Andi Hamzah, relatively low employee salaries in some developing countries, such as Indonesia, trigger employees to use their power to increase their income.13 Those with relatively large incomes also practice massive corruption due to greed, but this is not a comphrehensive case. Andi Hamzah also fully accepted Gunner Myrdal’s opinion that eliminating corruption in developing countries should be done by 1) Improving the salary level of low and middle-level employees, 2) Improving the morale of high-ranking officials, 3) Legalizing illegal levies into official or legal income.14
3.Gratuity Control
Gratuity control aims to control gratuity acceptance by increasing understanding and awareness of gratuity reporting that is transparent and accountable under laws and regulations. The main principles in carrying out gratuity control activities include 1.
Transparency, 2. Accountability, 3. Legal Certainty, 4. Expediency, 5. Common Interest, 6.
Independence, and 7. Protection for Whistleblowers. Below is the elaboration of gratuity control principles:15
Firstly is transparency. The procedures for reporting the acceptance of gratuity to the KPK (corruption eradication commission) indicate transparency or openness. The reporting procedure is a medium for civil servants/state administrators to test and guarantee the validity of several receipts obtained concerning their position as civil servants/state administrators. Secondly is accountability. The principle of accountability refers to the gratuity reporter and the KPK as the state institution assigned and authorized by law to receive gratuity reports. To the gratuity reporter, the principle of accountability is applied as an obligation from civil servants/state administrators entrusted with the mandate to carry out their duties and authorities in their position.
Thirdly is legal certainty. In line with the conception of Indonesia as a state of law, KPK prioritizes the basis of legislation, propriety, and aspects of justice in carrying out its duties. Fourthly is expediency. This principle refers to utilizing gratuity items determined as state property to be used to the greatest extent for the state’s benefit. Fifthly is common interest. The principle of common interest embodies the application of the concept of the people as the holder of sovereignty. Therefore, the arrangements and decisions taken by the state administration aim to maximize the people’s interests. Sixthly is independence.
For gratuity reporters, independence is demonstrated by rejecting all gratuity related to their position or reporting the gratuity that is considered a bribe to the KPK. Lastly is protection for whistleblowers. The gratuity reporter can be categorized as a whistleblower as intended by Article 15 letter (a) of the KPK Law. Therefore, under this regulation, the KPK must protect them.
4. Establishing a Gratuity Control Unit
Gratuity Control Unit (GCU) is formed and appointed by an authorized official at a state institution that organizes the state or regional financial management to carry out the
13 Andi Hamzah, Pemberantasan Korupsi Melalui Hukum Pidana Nasional Dan Internasional (Raja Grafindo Persada 2015), p. 227.
14 ibid.
15 Peraturan KPK Nomor 2 Tahun 2019 tentang Pelaporan Gratifikasi.
function of controlling or supervising gratuity. Government agencies, such as Indonesian State-Owned enterprises (BUMN) or Regionally-Owned Enterprises (BUMD) must establish GCU. Public official agencies other than the agencies/institutions referred to establish GCU in their respective work environments. Guidelines for establishing GCUs are detailed in the Commission’s Regulations. The UPG has a position in the work unit that carries out its duties and functions in compliance or monitoring. UPG has the following responsibilities:
a. Receiving, analyzing, and administering reports of receiving gratuities from civil servants, state officials, or other public officials;
b. Receiving and administering reports of gratuities rejection by civil servants, state administrators, or other public officials.;
c. Forwarding the report on the gratuities acceptance to the commission;
d. Making a recapitulation report of gratuities acceptance and rejection reports periodically to the commission;
e. Submitting the results of managing reports on the acceptance and rejection of gratuities and proposing gratuity control policies to the leaders of the respective agencies;
f. Socializing gratuity rules to internal and external parties of government agencies, BUMN, and BUMD;
g. Maintaining gratuities items until the status is determined; and h. Monitoring and evaluating to control gratuity.
The gratuities recipient shall report to the GCU within ten working days or to the commission within 30 working days from receiving the gratuity. Furthermore, the relevant GCU must continue the gratuity report to the commission within a maximum of ten working days from the date the report is received.16 Land Agency is a vertical agency of the Ministry of Agrarian Affairs and Spatial Planning (ATR/BPN) in the Regency/City, which is under and responsible to the Minister of ATR/BPN through the Regional Agency of ATR/BPN.17 Article 18 Ministerial Regulation ATR/BPN Number 17 of 2020 stipulated that the Land Agency consists of a. Subdivision of Administration; b. Section of Survey and Mapping; c. Section of Rights Determination and Registration; d. Section of Structuring and Empowerment, e. Section of Land Acquisition and Development; and f. Section of Dispute Control and Management.Government employees are required to have high integrity, competency and courage to reject all types of gratuities classified as bribes. If they cannot refuse them, they can report all gratuities from Notary/Land Deed Officials (Notaris-PPAT) or parties interested in the land sector to the related institutions. The scheme in Table 2 illustrates the Gratuity Control model at the Land Agency, which helps the GCU, which is compulsory to form per KPK Regulation Number 2 of 2019.
Table 2: Gratuities Acceptance Data as a Management Tool for Gratuity Control Strategies
No. Recip- ient Name
Position at the
Land Agency Receiving Time
Place &
Activity Form/
Authority
Giver’s
Name Relationship Form of
Gratuity
16 Corruption Eradication Commission Regulation Number 2 of 2019 concerning Gratuity Reporting.
17 Muliawan and Jarot Widya, UUPA Dan Organisasi Lembaga ATR/BPN (Master of Notary, Unnar 2022).
1 X1 Head of Land Agency
- Anytime - Every
Holiday - Every im-
plemen- tation of authority
Place:
- At office - At home - Agreed
place Activity Forms:
- On Demand - As agreed Form of Authority:
- According to each authority
PPAT-A Colleagues
- Money - Items - Insurance - Parcels - Lunch - Entertain-
ment
2 X2 Sub-section
Administration PPAT-B Colleagues
3 X3 Section of
Survey and
Mapping PPAT-C Colleagues
4 X4
Section of Rights Determination
& Registration
PPAT-D Colleagues
5 X5 Section of
Structuring and
Empowerment PPAT-E Colleagues
6 X6 Section of Land Acquisition and
Development PPAT-F Colleagues
7 X7
Section of Dispute Control and Management
PartiesThe Litigants 8
Frequency Acceptance of per Person
Section
& Level of Position Vulnerable to
Acceptance
Authority Vulnerable to
Acceptance
The Party Gives Who Often
Work Relations
That Are Prone to Acceptance
Types of Gratuity that Often
Occur
INFORMATION PROCESS AND UTILIZATION
Frequency of Acceptance per Person
Section & Level of Position Vulnerable to
Acceptance
Authority Vulnerable to
Acceptance
The Party Who Gives
Often
Work Relations That Are Prone to Acceptance
Types of Gratuity that Often Occur
Measure- ment of Employee Compliance
Measurement of Imposition and Risk Mitigation of Each Section, Position Level, and Recommen-
dations
Activity Risk Mitigation in the Imple- mentation of Work and Recommenda-
tions
Consolida- tion and Dissemina- tion of Rules
to Stake- holders
Mitigation of Risks in Em- ployment Re- lationships in Each Position and Recommen-
dations
The basis for De- termining “Rea-
sonableness”
Criteria in Giving Gratuity in the Related Environ-
ment MANAGEMENT TOOLS
CONTROL MEASURES SUPPORTING POLICY 1. Identifying other recipients with the
whistleblower system approach.
2. Evaluating risk mitigation results on the unit facts, vulnerable activities, and follow-up supervision.
3. Evaluating rule enforcement.
4. Blacklisting of PPATs who violate the rules.
5. Strengthening rules based on the development of organizational units.
1. Leadership commitment and reporting examples as role models.
2. Measuring and evaluating the imposition and risk, and employee compensation/income.
3. Providing rewards/incentives for employees.
4. Including aspects of reporting compliance in promotion or transfer criteria for officials/employees.
5. Establishing rules and procedures for the protection of gratuity whistleblowers.
Source: Agus Kasiyanto [2022] [compiled from various sources].
Establish an Anti-Bribery Management System [ABMS]
Bribery is a common legal issue in the public service sector.18 ABMS (Anti-Bribery Management System) is a standard with requirements and provides guidelines to define, implement, maintain, review, and improve an anti-bribery management system. This method minimizes the risk of bribery and provides evidence to management, employees, customers, and business partners that the Notary/Land Deed Officials (Notaris-PPAT) Office has implemented internationally reputable anti-bribery standards. It also indicates that the company is taking the proper steps to prevent bribery.19 ABMS is a procedure to detect, identify, prevent, and respond to bribery and evaluate the risks. Bribery has become a widespread phenomenon. It can occur due to 1) poor systems, (2) weak law enforcement, and (3) a culture of permissiveness. ABMS is designed to detect bribery and foster an organization’s anti-bribery culture. Implementing ABMS requires policy direction from top management and programs that must be socialized to all staff and external parties, such as vendors, suppliers, contractors, and collaborators.
The obvious benefit of ISO 37001 is improving the organization’s management system.
Companies with anti-bribery certification will have the competence to mitigate bribery risks more adequately. Using the PDCA [Plan-Do-Check-Action] cycle approach, implementation success depends on top management’s commitment, leadership, and all members’ involvement. It requires documented information in its performance based on a risk approach. Based on the six basic principles of implementing ABMS based on ISO 37001: 2016, it is hoped that the organization will continually improve its performance in producing and forming a clean work environment, free from corrupt practices, bribery, and gratuity that harm the organization or even the state. Six basic principles must be considered in creating and developing an ISO 37001:2016-based ABMS. These principles can be understood through an in-depth definition of the requirements in ISO 37001:2016.
The six basic principles are:20
18 Angga Wijaya Holman Fasa and Sofia Yuniar Sani, ‘Sistem Manajemen Anti-Penyuapan ISO 37001:2016 Dan Pencegahan Praktik Korupsi Di Sektor Pelayanan Publik’ (2021) 6 Integritas : Jurnal Antikorupsi 187 <https://jurnal.kpk.go.id/index.php/integritas/article/view/684>.
19 ‘Ibfgi.Com’.
20 Kukuh S Achmad, ‘SNI ISO 37001 Certification In Indonesia’, International Business Integrity Conference (KPK 2018).
1. Top Management Commitment
Top management’s role and commitment to implementing ISO 37001:2016 ABMS is the main success factor. Top management must put that commitment into practice and ensure that all levels of the organization understand the goals and targets of the ABMS that the organization will achieve. This role and commitment can be in setting policies, serving on the supervisory board, conducting ABMS performance reviews, taking actions aligned with ABMS implementation, and other measures.
2. Risk Identification and Analysis
Organizations must identify and analyze the risk of bribery to understand the potential risks that may occur in corporate business processes. Based on the identification and analysis results, mitigation measures for the bribery risk are then implemented, controlled, monitored, and evaluated for suitability and effectiveness in light of the current situation and circumstances.
3. Due Diligence
One of the requirements that must be implemented by organizations that carry out ABMS ISO 37001: 2016 is due diligence. It is a data collection process to determine the track record of related parties who want to work with or become part of the organization. Every organization should have procedures for carrying out this due diligence. These associated parties include prospective employees, vendors, suppliers, contractors, customers, and others. Due diligence is also carried out on members who wish to occupy several positions or functions, all with risk values above the low-risk assessment limit. The positions or functions include management level, marketing, procurement, Anti-Bribery Compliance Function [ABCF], Whistle Blowing System [WBS] Team, and others.
4. Adequate Documented Information
All organizations that want to implement ABMS based on ISO 37001:2016 are required to determine policies and documented information according to the standards of laws and regulations required by the organization. The document must support the organization in controlling the risk of bribery or gratuity in the corporation’s business.
5. Communication
All policies and regulations related to the ABMS implementation need to be communicated and socialized to the parties related to the organization, both internal and external.
Organizations must implement these communication procedures, including training and socialization through social media, websites, billboards, posters, banners, emails, and others.
6. Monitoring and Evaluation
The implementation of ABMS ISO 37001:2016 must be maintained and controlled so that it always runs properly or effectively. Therefore, monitoring and evaluating the ISO 37001:
2016 ABMS System implementation must be carried out continuously and periodically.
The top management must ensure that the monitoring and evaluation process is always performed correctly. The results of the monitoring and evaluation process can be in the form of recommendations for revisions, corrections, improvements, or changes and improvements to the implemented system.
Benefit; ABMS is a standard that can be used by all organizations in all sectors (public, private, and non-profit) and is not limited to the size of an organization. The benefits for organizations that implement ABMS are: 1) Supporting the organization in implementing an anti-bribery management system and improving the existing supervision or
monitoring and control system, 2) Supporting the organization in mapping bribery risks in the organization and guiding in mitigating the risks precisely, 3) Guaranteeing the stakeholders, customers, and other business partners that the organization has implemented an internationally recognized anti-bribery management system function, 4) Improving the value of the organization.
Developing a Whistleblowing Management System [WMS]
A whistleblower is often understood as a reporting witness. A whistleblower is a person who sees, hears, experiences, or is related to bribery and gratuity and provides a report of allegations regarding the existence or ongoing of a bribe and gratuity, preferably to the GCU that has been established by the investigator either in the police/prosecutor’s office /KPK. A whistleblower provides a report or evidence about an alleged bribe or gratuity to Law Enforcement Officials (LEO) in the criminal justice process. However, whistleblowers are not part of the perpetrators of bribery and gratuity crimes [givers or recipients]
reported. The reporting process can be done through the Regional Office or Land Agency, which acts as the leading unit in the WMS and is the person in charge or the pioneer of land services. Whistleblower system with guidance and reference to ISO: 37002-WMS can be used as a standard in building a land service system that minimizes the occurrence of bribery and gratuity.
According to Firdaus Ilyas, the main principles of ISO: 37002-WMS are trust, impartiality, and protection. These standard guides organizations in establishing, implementing, maintaining, and improving ISO: 37002-WMS. The purpose and benefits of implementing ISO: 37002-WMS to the organization are as follows:21
Purposes:
a. Encouraging and facilitating reporting of violations;
b. Supporting and protecting whistleblowers and others involved;
c. Ensuring that whistleblowing reports are handled promptly and timely; and d. Improving organizational culture, governance, and prevention of violations.
Benefits:
a. Enabling the organization to identify and address mistakes as early as possible;
b. Preventing or minimize asset loss and assists in the recovery of lost assets;
c. Ensuring compliance with organizational policies, procedures, and legal and social obligations;
d. Attracting and retaining personnel committed to the organization’s values and culture,
e. Demonstrating reasonable and ethical governance practices to the public, markets, regulators, owners, and other stakeholders.
Building a Corporation [Notary Office-PPAT] with Integrity
So far, the Indonesian public understands corruption as a criminal act related to state finances in the public sector and involving public officials. However, corrupt practices can be found anywhere in the public and private sectors. Corruption happens from low- level staff to directors, leaders, or even shareholders of companies or corporations. In the plan to amend the Corruption Law regarding the adoption of UNCAC (United Nations Convention Against Corruption), it is stated that fraud in the private environment will be included in the form of corruption crime in the future.
21 Ilyas Firdaus, Sistem Manajemen Whistleblowing (Visi Integritas 2021), p. 13-15.
Quoted from the Guidebook on Corruption Prevention for the Business World published by KPK-KADIN, to ensure that corruption prevention efforts can be carried out thoroughly, the KPK together with KADIN (the Indonesian Chamber of Commerce and Industry), experts and practitioners in good governance, should publish a corruption prevention guide for the business world. The guide contains general measures to be taken by a company or corporation to prevent corruption. The guide steps designed are simple and practical so that it can be taken and adapted to the needs of the company or corporation.
Guidelines are prepared with the PDCA [Plan, Do, Check, Action] approach with a response phase to complete the cycle. Thus, the guidelines are continuous in a cycle. A leadership commitment as a foundation for preventing corruption is necessary to implement the PDCA cycle effectively. The PDCA cycle can be described as follows:
COMMITMENT
Leadership commitment of Notary-PPAT is the most elementary aspect in successfully implementing corruption prevention efforts. This aspect will influence the direction of corruption prevention efforts, which can be seen in the policies and strategies of the company/corporation.
PLAN
Corporations must develop a plan to run effectively and comprehensively for corruption prevention efforts. They must know the legislation governing corporate criminalization and identify corruption risks that may affect corporations in planning corruption prevention through a risk-based approach. By understanding the corruption risk map, corporations will find it easier to develop regulations regarding the things needed to prevent corruption following the objectives set.
DO Corporations carry out various activities to prevent corruption during the implementation phase based on the set plans. These activities are based on each corporation’s necessities and competencies.
CHECK
At the evaluation phase, the company or corporation will recheck the phases that have been done, from planning to implementation. Evaluation is carried out to ensure that the corporation runs the business following the predetermined targets and objectives.
ACTION
The main concern of this phase is the corrective function. If the previous phases are done well, then the planning-implementation-evaluation cycle can be repeated. However, suppose there are mismatches, misappropriations, or changes impacting efforts to achieve targets and goals. In that case, revisions and corrections must be made to make the PDCA cycle better and more appropriate.
RESPONSE
Response is a key phase of this cycle as it is an alternative way out of the less competitive business challenges experienced by companies that have implemented all these corruption prevention cycles.
Conclusion
Educating Land Agency employees to constantly protect themselves from committing acts of corruption is crucial. Employees also need insight into regulations and signs about corruption to avoid things that harm themselves, their families, and the agencies where they work. An anti-corruption culture is fostered to create honest and trustworthy employees
at work. Employees must understand the laws of bribery and gratuity to strengthen the identity of treasury personnel as Land Agency employees with integrity and always apply an anti-corruption culture in the work environment. Employees should also refuse gratuity in all forms. If they cannot refuse immediately, they must report it to the GCU or KPK. Furthermore, the Notary-PPAT Office should implement ABMS ISO 37001: 2016, an international standard. ABMS is a procedure to detect, identify, prevent, and respond to bribery, evaluate the risks, and improve the anti-bribery compliance program. The ISO 37001:2016 ABMS is essential because its implementation can reduce corporate risk and expense due to bribery through a manageable framework for preventing, tracking, and addressing bribery in the corporation.
Bibliography
Achmad KS, ‘SNI ISO 37001 Certification In Indonesia’, International Business Integrity Conference (KPK 2018)
Andi Hamzah, Pemberantasan Korupsi Melalui Hukum Pidana Nasional Dan Internasional (Raja Grafindo Persada 2015)
Chaerudin, Strategi Pencegahan Dan Penegakan Hukum Pidana Korupsi (Refika Aditama 2008)
Departemen Pendidikan Nasional, Kamus Besar Bahasa Indonesia (Gramedia 2011) Djaja Ermansjah, Tipologi Tindak Pidana Korupsi Di Indonesia (Mandar Maju 2010)
Farida Patittingi & Fajlurrahman, Korupsi Kekuasaan:Dilema Penegakan Hukum Diatas Hegemoni Oligarki (Rajawali Pers 2016)
Holman Fasa AW and Sani SY, ‘Sistem Manajemen Anti-Penyuapan ISO 37001:2016 Dan Pencegahan Praktik Korupsi Di Sektor Pelayanan Publik’ (2021) 6 Integritas : Jurnal Antikorupsi 187 <https://jurnal.kpk.go.id/index.php/integritas/article/view/684>
‘Ibfgi.Com’
Ilyas Firdaus, Sistem Manajemen Whistleblowing (Visi Integritas 2021)
Jeremy Pompe, Strategi Memberantas Korupsi: Elemen Sistem Integritas Nasional (Yayasan Pustaka Obor Indonesia 2003)
KEMENAG dan KPK, Gratifikasi Dalam Perpektif Agama (KEMENAG dan KPK 2019) KPK, Pedoman Pengendalian Gratifikasi (KPK 2015)
Muchsin, Kekuasaan Kehakiman Yang Merdeka (Independence Judiciary) (UNTAG PRESS 2010)
Muliawan and Jarot Widya, UUPA Dan Organisasi Lembaga ATR/BPN (Master of Notary, Unnar 2022)
Peter Mahmud Marzuki, Penelitian Hukum (6th edn, Kencana Prenada Media Group 2005) Prakasa SUW, ‘Anti-Corruption Survivor, Academic Freedom, and The’ (2019) 4 Petita:
Jurnal Kajian Ilmu Hukum dan Syariah 163
Ratno Lukito, ‘Shariah And The Politics Of Pluralism In Indonesia: Understanding State’s Rational Approach To Adat And Islamic Law’ (2019) Volume 4 Petita : Jurnal Kajian Ilmu Hukum dan Syariah
Robert Klitgaard, Controlling Corruption (Yayasan Pustaka Obor Indonesia 2005)
Romli Atmasasmita, Sekitar Masalah Korupsi, Aspek Nasional Dan Aspek International (Mandar Maju 2004)
Yuslem N, ‘Sharia Contextualisation To Establish the Indonesian Fiqh’ (2020) 5 Petita : Jurnal Kajian Ilmu Hukum dan Syariah
Putusan Nomor 9/PidSus-TPK/2019/PN Mnk [Berkekuatan Hukum Tetap]
Corruption Eradication Commission Regulation Number 2 of 2019 concerning Gratuity Reporting.
Peraturan KPK Nomor 2 Tahun 2019 tentang Pelaporan Gratifikasi.
