Indonesia National Auditor Finds $5b Worth of Irregularities

Jakarta Globe, Robertus Wardi & Novi Lumanauw, November 12, 2013

President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono receives the audit from hai Poernomo,
chairman of the Supreme Audit Agency. (Rumgapres Photo/Abror Rizki)

The government audit body discovered almost 14,000 instances of financial irregularities amounting to trillions of rupiah in the first half of 2013 alone.

The Supreme Audit Agency ( BPK) attributed the irregularities to weaknesses in internal control systems and non-compliance of Article 18 of the State Audit Law, passed in 2004.

“Based on the audit result for the first semester of 2013, we found 13,969 instances of irregularities with the sum of Rp 56.98 trillion [$5 billion],” said BPK chairman Hadi Poernomo after submitting the report to President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono at the Presidential Office on Monday.

Hadi said based on the findings, 4,589 cases could lead to a further Rp 10.74 trillion in potential state losses. Other findings involved 779 irregularities in administration, inefficiencies, and ineffectiveness bringing a total loss of Rp 46.24 trillion.

Hadi said the audit covered 597 objects and were conducted on the central government, regional governments, state enterprises, regional enterprises, and other institutions which manage the state’s money.

Based on the audit types, 519 were conducted on financial reports, nine on performance and 69 special purpose audits (PDTT).

Meanwhile, a BPK report from July 6 shows that a presidential adviser and several Papuan legislators received hundreds of millions of rupiah under the guise of social aid from the budget of one of the least developed provinces in the country.

It was revealed that recipients of the money included local councilors and presidential adviser Velix Vernando Wanggai, who received Rp 200 million.

The BPK report said the money to Velix, paid by the Papua provincial administration, was meant for the printing expenses of 3,000 copies of a book titled “Development for All: Managing Regional Development.”

Robert Jitmau, an analyst on social matters, said the money should have been allocated for the underprivileged.

“It’s called social aid, which means it should be used for social activities,” he said.

“The councilors and the presidential adviser should be fighting for the people’s rights and not taking it from them.

“The money they took should have been for the people to fight for their interests,’’ Robert added.

Although the recipients were able to account for the money, Robert said it was still unethical of them to have accepted.