Will SBY end up like Nixon? "Impeach SBY," one reader of Kompas.com campaigned. "This is the New Order Part II," another reader commented. Others tend to be sarcastic. "This is a revenge because KPK prosecuted the father-in-law of his son...", "This is a systematic action to kill KPK..."
"He let this from happening so his cronies could corrupt absolutely, following his teacher, Soeharto. Cikeas Dynasty." "Who asked you to vote for SBY?" others commented. These hate posts are reflection of how upset people are on SBY and his men.
Main targets of public criticism are Bambang Hendarso Danuri (Police Chief), Susno Duadji (head of criminal investigation unit), Hendarman Supandji (Attorney General), Abdul Hakim Ritonga (deputy AG), and Djoko Suyanto (coordinating minister for politic, security, law, and human rights). They are all the president's men.
Police and AGO have widely been considered responsible in what popularly believed as criminalization of Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK).
Watergate scandal implicated Nixon, which led to his downfall, mainly because his men masterminded the plot against Democratic Party. Nixon is the ultimate beneficiary owner of their actions. The question in the KPK fiasco is of course whether SBY could be considered benefited from the plot against KPK leaders.
It is true that SBY made "strange" statements. He, for example, once said "KPK has grown into an overly powerful institution." He also expressed "concern"about KPK's wiretapping thing. But we can't answer the question based on his statements, including the recent controversial tapped conversation which mentioned SBY.
Bibit and Chandra are prosecuted based on "statements" from former KPK chairman Antasari Azhar (detained in multiple cases) that he "heard" the flow of Rp6.7 billion funds to KPK leaders.
Police then named Bibit and Chandra suspects in "bribery" case. But when they failed to get convincing evidence, they moved to different allegation: abuse of power.
With three KPK leaders named suspects, president SBY then issued government regulation in lieu of law to install three provisional leaders for KPK. The main reason was because KPK needs at least three leaders to make crucial decisions.
But on Thursday, October 29, Constitutional Court dropped "a bomb" with its verdict where Bibit and Chandra can't be suspended.
Interestingly SBY said "this is just a case, like others," while public, including Constitutional Court, believe "this is an extraordinary case."
But of course SBY wants to be perceived as a president who upholds the law when he said "I don't want to intervene the investigation." But he seems to miss is law without the sense of justice is meaningless. He is trapped in a formal process of law framed by police and AGO or men around him.
Everybody shared his view on the importance to honor any formal legal process. But they felt something the president might not. Rationale built by police to detain Bibit and Chandra is not shared by most people.
When police said Bibit and Chandra made too many press statement which affected investigation, and as a result they should be detained, is horrible from human rights perspective. Under the law, everybody, even if he or she is convicted reserved the right to talk.
He might wants to be perceived of "not taking sides". But his inaction is considered an endorsement to police, an indirect support to police, so he is taking sides. Unfortunately, people have completely different view about police. SBY seems trusts on police so much while most people doubt and cynical.
