Board of the Central Information Commission (KIP) ordered the Indonesian Police to provide information on holder names of 17 Police accounts and the amount of value that has been categorized as fair to the Indonesian Corruption Watch (ICW), announced the KIP Chairman Ahmad Alam Saragih in the trial which was held at the Constitutional Court Building on Tuesday (8 / 2).
Jakarta, MKOnline - Board of the Central Information Commission (KIP) ordered the Indonesian Police to provide information on holder names of 17 Police account and the amount of value that has been categorized as fair to the Indonesian Corruption Watch (ICW) as the applicant within a period not later than 17 (seventeen) working days from the decision with permanent legal force. That was the verdict read by the Chairman of KIP Ahmad Alam Saragih in session held at the Constitutional Court Building on Tuesday (8/2).
"Stating that information on the name of the account holder of 17 police officers along with the amount of value that has been categorized as fair according to the announcement by Police Headquarters on July 23, 2010 is open information. To revoke the Respondent's decision regarding the refusal to provide information on the name of the account holder of 17 police officers and the amount of value that has been categorized as fair, "explained Alamsyah accompanied by two other commissioners, namely Henny S. Widyaningsih and Ramly Amin Simbolon.
The adjudication trial of disputes between the public information and a public legal entity with the famous case 'fat account ' of Police officers, previously held on Tuesday (18 / 1), at the Panel Courtroom, 4th floor. The trial takes advantage of video conference technology owned by the Constitutional Court broadcasted live to 12 universities.
In their petition, ICW submitted the requested information related to the account owner's name 17 members of the Police along with the amount of fair value that have been categorized as fair by the National Police Headquarters after the inspection date of July 23, 2010 on 23 members' accounts in accordance to the Reports on Analysis Results (LHA) INTRAC. ICW argues that the police did not respond to an objection ICW after 30 working days, the deadline set by Article 36 paragraph (2) UU KIP.
In the legal consideration read by Commissioner Henny S. Widyaningsih, KIP Board believes that the argument of the Police as a Respondent who refused only on the basis of Article 10 A Act 25 of 2003 as the Amendment of Act No. 15 of 2002 on Money Laundering (AML Law) are not sufficient to serve as grounds for rejecting the request to the information a quo. "That disclosing the value of information as requested by the Petitioner was not proven to inhibit the process of inquiry and investigation as referred to Article 17 letter a number 1 Act on KIP. That disclosing the account owner's name information as requested by the Petitioner is not proven to inhibit the process of inquiry and investigation as referred to Article 17 letter a number 1 UU KIP, "said Henny. (Lulu Anjarsari/mh/YDJ)
Wednesday, February 16, 2011 | 13:30 WIB 310