Habiburokhman Slams Mahfud Md‘s Criticism on Prabowo’s Amnesty Idea for Corruptors
Habiburokhman, the Deputy Chairman of the Gerindra Party, has lashed out at former Coordinating Minister for Political, Legal, and Security Affairs Mahfud MD‘s criticism of President Prabowo Subianto‘s proposal to grant amnesty to corruptors who return the stolen assets. Habiburokhman, speaking at a press conference at the Commission III Room on Friday, December 27, 2024, dismissed Mahfud’s criticism, stating that it was inconsistent with Mahfud’s own track record as a minister under President Joko Widodo’s administration.
"Mahfud MD, who himself scored only 5 out of 10 in law enforcement during his five-year tenure as a minister, dare to criticize President Prabowo’s proposal?" Habiburokhman questioned. Mahfud, via social media, had criticized Prabowo’s proposal, arguing that it contradicted the principle of law enforcement.
Habiburokhman, however, defended Prabowo’s proposal, stating that it was not an attempt to encourage lawbreaking. Instead, he interpreted the proposal as a sign of Prabowo’s commitment to recovering state assets. He accused Mahfud of instigating a false narrative that Prabowo was promoting lawlessness.
Prabowo had earlier proposed leniency for corruptors who returned the stolen assets and expressed willingness to grant amnesty to them. Speaking at an event with Indonesian students at Al-Azhar University in Cairo, Egypt, Prabowo stated that he wanted to give corruptors the chance to repent.
Mahfud, however, argued that such a move would contradict Article 55 of the Criminal Code (KUHP), which stipulates that anyone who actively participates in a crime could be prosecuted. He warned that Prabowo’s proposal could hamper law enforcement efforts and urged the President to be more cautious in making such statements.
Minister of Justice Yusril Ihza Mahendra, however, supported Prabowo’s proposal, stating that it was in line with the United Nations Convention Against Corruption (UNCAC). He also emphasized the importance of law enforcement in preventing corruption, ideally restoring the losses incurred by the state due to corruption, and rehabilitating the offenders.
In the midst of this debate, Prabowo’s proposal has sparked a conversation about the potential changes in the philosophy of criminal justice in Indonesia, moving away from retribution and towards restorative and rehabilitative justice, as Yusril Ihza Mahendra pointed out in his statement.
