Danang on Corruption and Party Financing

This week Danang Widoyoko, a Coordinator at ICW, in a op-ed in the Semarang based Suara Merdeka drew attention to the link between corruption and party financing, including election campaign funds and day-to-day operational costs.  Full op-ed available here.

OF recent uncovered corruption scandals, most relate to politics such as the athletes village, bribery at the Ministry of Manpower and the traveler’s checks bribery case [relating to the appointment of Miranda Goeltem to the Central Bank].  These all relate to funding of political parties, both for election campaign and every political party operational costs.

Similarly, cases of corruption involving the regional heads almost always relate to winning local elections. Direct elections involve great costs.  It is an investment that must be returned. Given that the large cost of winning is not comparable with official income received, then graft is necessary.  No matter how much his salary, it will not be able to cover expenses that run to 10-100 billion rupiah ($1-10 million).

DARI sejumlah skandal korupsi yang terbongkar, sebagian besar terkait politik seperti kasus wisma atlet, suap di Kemenakertrans dan kasus cek pelawat. Muaranya untuk pendanaan parpol, baik untuk kampanye, operasional pemilu atau operasional partai politik sehari-hari.

Demikian juga kasus korupsi yang melibatkan kepala daerah, hampir semuanya terkait dengan pemenangan pemilihan kepala daerah (pilkada). Pilkada langsung membutuhkan ongkos besar. Itu adalah investasi yang harus dikembalikan. Karena besarnya ongkos pemenangan tidak sebanding dengan penghasilan resmi yang diterima, maka korupsi menjadi pilihan. Sebesar apa pun gajinya tidak akan mampu menutupi pengeluaran yang mencapai puluhan hingga ratusan miliar rupiah.

This problem is not unique to Indonesia.  The United States is struggling to deal with the corrupting influence of money on American election campaigns and thus American policy making.  Here’s an interesting idea from the Massachusetts senate campaign, where the two main candidates, Scott Brown and Elizabeth Warren, have agreed to make contributions to others charity if third parties run campaign ads on their behalf (see article here).  The idea is to reduce the influence of third parties and money on the campaign.

h/t KP2KKN’s media archive blog, here.

h/t Chris Blattnam for the article on the senate race in Massachusetts, here.

Tagged , ,

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: