7 November 2013
Further hearing on Putra Batam University against Nampat Silangit is getting more bizarre as the Batam State Court Judges Council led by Merrywati is deviating from Supreme Court Regulation No. 2/2011.
The trial, held on Thursday (7/11/2013), was opened by presenting evidence from defendant and plaintiff. The evidence of decision from the Information Commission (KI) was rejected by the judges because it was not the original one. “It was rejected even though it is the same as the original one and was signed,” said Nampat Silangit.
The Supreme Court Regulation No. 2/2011 stipulates that Batam State Court Secretariat is the one that request proof of letter to the KI Secretariat. “Because this is an appeal, the decision from KI should’ve been verified. This is unfair and deviates from the Supreme Court regulation,” said Silangit.
In the previous trial, Silangit said the Batam State Court ignored the Supreme Court Regulation No. 2/2011 about Procedure to Solve Public Information Dispute in Court. The regulation states that hearing on public information should only involve KI’s decision, case files and answers for written objections from all parties. Article 2 also stresses that hearing is carried out without mediation,” said Silangit.
However, what happened during the trial violated the regulation because all parties were given time to conduct mediation.
“It means that the judges have violated the Supreme Court regulation,” said Nampat Silangit.
Silangit was shocked why the judges did not know about the regulation. “It’s 2013. The should’ve known about the regulation,” said Silangit.
9 October 2012
TRIBUNLAMPUNG.co.id –The Lampung Information Commission (KI) has ordered the Lampung Irrigation and Settlement Agency to publish information on budget execution document (DPA) and letters of accountability (SPI) of drinking water and wastewater development program and housing community empowerment program from 2010 to 2012 requested by local NGO Tiem 99.
The decision was taken after the trial verdict at Lampung KI office on Thursday. Representatives from the Irrigation and Settlement Agency were not present.
In the trial, the judge council granted plaintiff’s request and determined that all requested information must be provided.
Regarding the decision, the commissioners have examined all evidence as stipulated in Law No. 14/2008 about Public Information Openness
13 November 2013
The Garut District Government has sued one of their citizens to the Supreme Court after the government lost a trial at Bandung Administrative Court (PTUN)
The lawsuit arose after the Garut Revenue, Financial Management and Regional Asset Agency (DPPKAD) lost in a dispute at West Java information Commission against Donny Setiawan, 37. “This lawsuit is our rights in accordance with the law,” said DPPKAD’s lawyer Margiyanto on Monday, 11 November 2013.
In the verdict dated 19 September 2013, PTUN judges endorsed the Information Commission’s decision. The judges ordered DPPKAD to provide copies of financial transaction documents of BJB, BNI, BRI and Bank Mandiri accounts from 2009 to 2010.
The basis of the dispute is alleged excess budget transfer from the central government of Rp 60 billion for revenue-sharing in 2010. There was also deposit of Rp 200 million that was reported in budget realization.
The budget difference was found in three documents, which are BPK examination report, the Ministry of Finance report about revenue-sharing realization and report of transfer confirmation by Finance Minister.
According to Margiyanto, DPPKAD rejected PTUN decision because it is still non-binding. They also objected to reveal all financial transactions because they are confidential. “Budget use is already in accordance with the regulation. BPK didn’t even find irregularities,” he said.
He hoped the Supreme Court would grant the Garut government’s plea and asked the judges to declare that the bank accounts are confidential. “However, whatever the decision later, we will accept it,” said Margiyanto.
Donny said the lawsuit against him was exaggerated and used to cover up budget irregularities. In the dispute trial, Donny said he only asked for journals and daily financial daily record of DPPKAD, not banking transactions of DPPKAD.
“The local government has no intention to obey the law. This is their arrogance to keep stealing from the people,” he said.
5 December 2013
12 political parties in Samarinda in 2013 received aid of Rp98 million from the government, based on information from Ridwan Tassa, assistant of social community secretariat at Samarinda City Government.
Tassa said every year, there are regulatory changes that political parties and the government should pay attention to, especially those that are related to steps that must be taken before aid is given.
Home Affairs Ministry’s financial expert staff Purwoto said political parties are obligated to submit reports on what the aid is spent on for accountability.
As public bodies, political parties must be transparent and accountable as they operate using public money. “Political parties must have cash books so that at the end of the year, any spending and income can be seen,” said Murwoto.
The classic problem is that political parties tend to be reluctant to submit financial reports as they think their funds cannot be compared with the funds managed by the government. However, it is not about the amount of funds. It is about how political parties are being transparent and accountable in using the public money as it is regulated in political parties law and public information openness law.
21 July 2013
East Kalimantan Information (KI) chairman Jaidun urged all public bodies in East Kalimantan to implement public information openness by utilizing their respective official website.
“The problem is many websites are still not in accordance with the public information openness law (UU KIP). Much information is still not published, such as the finance. Only a few public bodies that update information on their budget,” said Jaidun.
Therefore, he asked for support from C omission I members of East Kalimantan DPRD and the East Kalimantan Government to remind their agencies to utilize their website. They should at least update any activities related to their agencies on their website.
“I hope every citizen knows every activity that uses the state budget so that people can oversee the use of state budget.
Jakarta Information Commission Selection Committee chairman Danardono Siradjudin said website is one of the ways to publish information from public bodies. He added that good website should provide information on which types of information public bodies can provide, online services to request information and which number people can contact to ask about information request.
Danar further explained that website is the reflection of public bodies. “If the website is good, then the public body who manages that website should also be in a good condition,” said Danar.
Taken from kaltimprov.go.id
24 July 2013
32 cases of information disputes so far this year still remain unprocessed in East Java Information Commission (KI) due to structural changes in Information Commission Regulation No. 1/2013 about Public Information Dispute Resolution Procedure.
According to East Java KI commissioner Daan Rahmad Tanod, the regulation has a clause that states information dispute case must be registered by a clerk who is, in this case, is the East Java KI secretary.
“However, no secretary has been appointed,” said Daan on Tuesday (23/7/2013).
Before the regulation is officially implemented, all information disputes can be solved because Information Commission Regulation No. 2/2010 that only appoints commissioner as clerk is still in place.
“Next month, we will try to use our discretion for the new regulation so that all cases can be resolved fast,” said he said.
Most of the 32 cases involve NGOs fighting against government and non-government agencies.
The non-government agencies are political parties that consist of Golkar, Hanura, PAN, Democratic Party and PKB. “Most requesters demand budget transparency,” he said.