INTERVIEW

uf
mad Yus
MuhamDate of Birth:

Muhammad Yusuf:

Why wasnt the Money

Laundering Law used?

, 1962
Place & matra, May 18 law,
u
S
in
ndidate
o, South
Pendop on: Doctoral ca c, High Institute
S
ti

a
M
c

u
y
d
E
Jakarta
ersit
ran Univ
r:
gement,
Padjadja mics and Mana donesia Caree
of Econo , University of In Director of Law
w
)
BSc in la , PPATK (2011 (2008 -2011)
n
n
Chairma ulations, PPATK afia Eradicatio
and Reg irector, Legal M f, Jakarta
Chie
nt D
Assista (2008 -2011) 007-2008)
(2
e
c
Unit
ffi
tors O
Prosecu

TEMPO/JACKY RACHMANSYAH

ITH the completion of Yunus Huseins term at the Financial Transactions Reporting and Analysis Center (PPATK), leadership of
this institute located in Harmoni, Central Jakarta passed on to Muhammad
Yusuf.
This shouldnt come as a surprise
to anyone. As PPATKs former director of law and regulations, Yusuf was
known as one of Yunuss most trusted
colleagues, because of his intelligence
and his integrity. This reputation preceded him when he headed the Jakarta
Prosecutors Office and when he drafted
the new Law on Money Laundering. He
regularly pores over legal articles and is
an expert in tracing the flow of illegal
funds. Equipped with this background,
Yusuf is expected to retain the reputation of the PPATK as a trusted and independent institution that is able to sniff
out corrupt money. Financial transactions, either by individuals or corporations, can open the way to the detention
of corruptors. This can be seen in the
travelers checks case and the graft in
the construction of the SEA Games athletes dormitory, which involved a number of politicians at the House of Representatives (DPR) in Senayan. Lamentably, they have only been charged with
the crime of corruption, and not of money laundering.
Yet, according to Muhammad Yusuf,
the use of the Law on the Crime of Corruption is often unfair. Only government officials seem to be legally liable,
while others are able to evade the law
and enjoy their ill-gotten money. If the
Money Laundering Law was used, everyone involved in the flow of the money
can be charged, Yusuf explained.
On Wednesday last week, Yusuf met
with Tempo reporters Nugroho Dewanto, Yophiandi Kurniawan, Gita Lal,
Martha Ruth and photographer Jacky
Rachmansyah at his office. Excerpts:

NOVEMBER 8, 2011 TEMPO | 57

How do you plan to lead the institution

that has been criticized by the DPR as lacking in independence and serving only
the interest of the power holders?
Let me stress that they are wrong in
thinking Pak Yunus (Yunus Husein,
the previous PPATK chairman) was not
neutral. Look at PPATKs latest catch.
It consists of people from a number of
political parties. Theres Muhammad
Nazaruddin from the Democrat Party.
In the travelers checks case, there were
politicians from the PDI-P, Golkar, the
PPP and others. From among the law
enforcers, we have reported judges,
prosecutors and policemen. Also bureaucrats. So, I dont see any indication
that the PPATK is not independent or
sides with a certain group.
So, why the criticism?
My view is that when Pak Yunus was
a member of the Legal Mafia Eradication Unit in charge of corruption case
suspect Gayus Tambunan, he saw
something was not right. For example,
it was never explained who benefited
from Gayuss manipulation of his taxes. One of the units fi ndings pointed to
the company, now owned by the heads
of specific political parties, so that it
seemed like a mandate from the Democrat Party.
The DPR also accused the PPATK of not
being fair in investigating the Bank Century bailout case?
The DPR asked us to audit the case.
But when we were about to submit the
results [to the DPR], the law wouldnt
allow us. Accordingly, we should only
submit the results of our investigation to the prosecutors, the police and
the Corruption Eradication Commission, or KPK. Wanting to accommodate the wishes of the DPR, we asked
the Supreme Court to guide us. The
DPR only wanted the audit results of
Rp6.7 trillion in bailout funds, while the
case consisted of many phases: during
the merger, when the first Short-Term
Funding (FPJP) and the second FPJP
were given.
Wasnt there money from Bank Century
going to one of the DPR commission
chairmen at that time?
Yes, and we discussed this with Pak
Chandra Hamzah and Pak Tumpak (Tumpak Hatorangan Panggabean,
KPK chair during 2009-2010). But I
dont know what happened after that.
The ball was in the hands of the KPK.
There shouldnt have been any more obstruction. If we follow the principle of
everyone being equal before the law, everyone should be investigated.
Wasnt there also funds going to one of
Bank Indonesias deputy governors?
The funds that went to Pak Budi Mu58 | TEMPO NOVEMBER
16 OKTOBER8,2011
2011

lia had nothing to do with the PPATK

audit. The bailout happened in 2009,
while the flow of funds took place in
2008. So, different times, right? Then
we audited the Bank Century money as
a bank. The money for Pak Budi was
not part of the banks money. It was given personally by Robert Tantular. So,
the money didnt immediately bring
suspicion. We still needed to fi nd out
the cause and effect and its context.
If the profile doesnt fit, shouldnt we be
suspicious?
Thats what I mean. We need to look
at the causality and its context. Does
it make sense? If I were in the civil service and I gave money to a businessman
I was questioning, of course it would
immediately attract attention. I am not
a businessman, why would I give that
much money? If he wanted to loan me
money, what for?
Back to the Bank Century case, why
didnt the audit to go the seventh layer?
Theres a misperception on the understanding of the word layer. If the flow of
funds happened in one country, thats
easy. But if it happened with another
bank, a foreign bank or a bank outside
of the country, that would take time.
The information technology of each
bank is not the same. Secondly, the way
of storing fi les differs, some are good,
others are bad. Imagine going to the
seventh layer, in the context of information technology, professionalism, and
the different system of storing fi les. Yet
the DPR and the investigator are short
of time. So we simplify the process, going only to the second layer, and we go
after Rp2 billion and above.
But dont foreign banks have good human resources and technology?
Not necessarily, it depends on whos
managing the bank.
Or perhaps the bank lacks transparency?
That could be the case. It cant be said
that all foreign banks are good. I dont
have to name them. But there is one
bank which I previously thought was
good, but evidently is full of non-compliance, making it difficult for us.
Does the new Money Laundering Law
make the work of the PPATK easier?
There are still problems, but not as
bad as before. For example, the law
provides for general and special audits. In simple terms, its about the account in Bank X under the name of Mr.
Y which was not reported to us, but he
was arrested by the KPK. If we are suspicious, we would immediately carry out a special audit but this depends
on the banks accommodation, because
in order to seek data, we would need
a password and so forth. Secondly,

TEMPO/SETO WARDHANA

INTERVIEW

theres a difference in the information

technology between private, government, foreign banks, even in provincial
banks. Peoples banks often dont have
the same technology.
Is it difficult to trace accounts with fictitious names?
Thats the next problem. Lets say we
start tracing it and it turns out the name
is fictitious. We lose the trail. Thats
why one of the recommendations of the
Money Laundering Committeewhose
executive chief is the PPATK chairmanis to ask the Home Affairs Ministry to immediately come up with a single identity number for people. The
ministry is now implementing the eKTP (ID card) project.
In the case involving Nazaruddin, whether the company is fictitious or not, funds
can still be traced, right?
Well, to fi nd out whether the 49 companies involved are fictitious or not,
would not be the authority of the investigator. We have no such authority. But
according to the new Money Laundering Law, if we analysts are short of information, we can ask for them. If its
not given to us, we can go to their address.
The KPK often does not use the Money
Laundering Law for cases like this. Have
there been discussions over this with the
KPK?
Not formally yet. But informally, I
have spoken to its commissioner, Chandra Hamzah. I said, in that law, the
KPK is given the authority to investigate money laundering cases. What is
this used for? Because if A commits corruption, and the money is given directly to B, B cannot be charged with corruption. But, if the Money Launder16 OKTOBER 2011 TEMPO | 58

M. Nazaruddin
after questioning
at the Corruption
Eradication
Commission,
Jakarta.

ing Law is applied, the person accepting the bribes can also be charged with
some kind of a crime, including money laundering. If the law applied is only
the Corruption Law, that would be unfair. Often, it is only officials that are
charged but the person receiving the
money goes unpunished.
The PPATK is able to trace bank transactions. What about cash transactions or
by using gold or diamonds?
We already suggested that during the
drafting of the Money Laundering and
Foreign Exchange Transaction laws,
that we were restricted to the amount of
Rp100 million only. If I wanted to buy
an Alphard car, Rp100 million can be
used. The rest would have to go through
a bank. But that part was rejected by
the DPR. Gold as a community is regulated in the new law. Those complaining or reporting to the PPATK are not
just banks but also service providers,
like people selling gold. The regulations come into effect in October 2012
because it still needs to be socialized, so
traders dont get shocked. We are currently building the instruments: whether to send an online report or not, the
form of the report and who the regulators are. Meanwhile, banking in Indonesia is regulated by Bank Indonesia, and its security by Bapepam, gold
and diamond vendors are regulated by
the PPATK, so that gold and diamonds
dont become illicit tools of transactions.
The single identity number should extend to bank accounts, taxes and so forth,
but its now nothing more than an e-ID
card.
Yes, thats right. I dont know why
thats all its become. But at least one

number means one person only, so when

people open an account, we can ask the
bank for data. The main thing is the
number. And that goes for the gold, diamond and car vendors, so that when
people buy, they are registered.
You originally came from the Attorney
Generals Office (AGO). Is the work at the
PPATK more difficult than in the AGO?
Actually, the AGO is a lot harder.
There we work with a time limit, because of how long we can detain a suspect. The case fi les must be completed
on time, otherwise, the suspect will escape. And the salary is small and we get
no protection. We get no weapons because of the police bureaucracy. At the
PPATK, we get enough pay. Top-level officials get bodyguards and enough
protection.
Is the oversight system at the PPATK
tighter than in the AGO?
When I was at the Jakarta District
Attorneys Office, I was able to retrieve
Rp2.5 trillion during the 2006-2008 period. Big cases can become big temptations, especially when wages are low.
Many people try to influence us because
the system is open, quite different over
here. Everyone who wants to meet me
must go through security and layers of
inspections. Conversely, at the AGO, envelopes fi lled with bribes awaited me
at my desk. I ask my secretary, What
is this? She answers me, the man said
he had already called you. I got angry,
Thats too much. Give it back! But
that person came to my house. Lucky
for me, my wife and domestic staff were
alert. In court during the trial, the lawyer drove in a beautiful car. So, when I
became the Assistant for Special Cases,
I managed the AGO funds for the prosecutors transportation. I gave them
Rp200,000 for the taxi ride to court.
Is it a big risk to work at the PPATK?
The risk is not big. The data we send
out are classified as secret. But at the
AGO, when I charge someone as a suspect, almost always theres someone
banging his fist on the table saying he
protests. When I handled the land conflict in Ciracas, I was threatened by a
mob of 10 people from a local association. I told them, Go ahead. Thats
why theres a lot more people who want
to work at the KPK or the PPATK. I feel
sorry for the Attorney General. What
ever he does, if the welfare aspect is not
improved, it will be difficult.
What about the internal oversight
system here? If an employee cheats,
wouldnt he still be able to meet outside
the office, for example, like at parties.
The environment here is stable. It
would feel awkward if there were no
errant employees. We have a whistle-

blower mechanism. When X has been

caught doing whatever, the news will
have spread like wildfi re, and through
email. Then there are the anonymous reports. There is an internal audit here too. In the car, so that the driver wouldnt understand, we spoke about
how to use the documents. I pinpointed what was right and what was wrong
in the documents. The driver listens,
but he wouldnt know what is wrong in
the document. I point to the document,
showing which one is a mistake. When
I was director of Law and Regulations, I
could not even enter the analysis room.
Even when I became the Legal Director, Pak Yunus showed me only the document that he wanted explain, particularly about the legal view. But then he
took back the document. I thought at
fi rst it was because I was not trusted,
but gradually I began to see and learnt
the ethics of working here.
What is the punishment for breaking the
PPATK ethics?
A reprimand will be done orally and
written up then returned to its respective offices. Like the time we planned to
build something here, one PPATK employee asked for help from a third party. That was seen as a mistake, so he just
got reprimanded because he needs to be
told to act professionally.
If oversight at the PPATK is that tight,
why are there data or report leaks?
I am not accusing. We sent it to the
third party, so we figured the leak happened there. So, moving forward, we
will speak fi rst with people we give reports to.
We heard that when you were at the
AGO, you opened a legal consulting company.
Not true. How can a prosecutor open
a legal consulting fi rm? But I do teach
at a number of places, in courses and in
consulting fi rms. Its one way of moonlighting because of my low salary as
a prosecutor. I also advised the police. Some expatriates have also asked
me for legal advice. So long as it does
not interfere with my working hours, I
was willing. After all, I am sharing my
knowledge, not my profession or information.
Would you dare to charge your
colleagues if you found their financial
transactions to be suspect?
You can ask Pak Darmono (Deputy Attorney General) about me when I
worked there. Once, when I was investigating a case, the nephew of an official
was involved in the case. I immediately told the official, Your nephew was
involved and I am not sure I should be
processing it. It didnt bother me then,
why should it bother me now?

NOVEMBER
16 OKTOBER
8, 2011 TEMPO | 59