What sanctions are used to punish the corrupt activities of a supplier?
Indonesia score: 100/100
Procurement officials have no authority to exclude companies or individuals implicated in bribery or corruption related offences.
Procurement officials have limited authority to exclude companies and senior company officials where there is a conviction or reasonable evidence of bribery & corruption related offences.
There is clear legislation and implementing guidelines empowering procurement officials to exclude companies and senior company officials where there is a conviction or credible evidence of bribery & corruption related offences.
Article 19 of Minister of Defence Regulation No. 17/2014 defines the authority and obligations of the ULP and its head . The Head of ULP is authorised to propose the dismissal of members of the working group who are found guilty of violating regulations or engaging in KKN (corruption, collusion or nepotism). The same regulation also requires the prospective supplier company to provide a statement confirming that it is neither currently under court supervision, nor is its director serving a criminal punishment. This is one of seven administrative conditions required to join a bid. Furthermore, Article 66 Paragraph (1) specifies the actions of providers that can be subject to sanctions, including attempting to influence the committee and conspiring to regulate prices. Article 66 Paragraph (2) stipulates four types of sanctions that can be imposed in addition to the unilateral termination of contracts by the PPK, namely administrative sanctions, blacklisting, civil lawsuits and criminal reporting. Administrative sanctions are imposed by the PPK, whereas blacklisting is carried out by the PA/KPA following input from the PPK. The blacklist is submitted by the MoD to the LKPP to be included in the national blacklist, which is posted on the national procurement portal and can be updated at any time. Similar arrangements were also found in procurement regulations for the police, for example, in Article 36 of Chief of Police Regulation No. 10/2015 .
 Ministry of Defence of the Republic of Indonesia. Jakarta, 2014. ‘Regulation of the Minister of Defence of the Republic of Indonesia No. 17/2014 concerning Implementation of Procurement of Main Equipment and Weapons Systems Within Ministry of Defence and the Indonesian National Defence Forces’. https://www.kemhan.go.id/kuathan/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/Peraturan-Menteri-Pertahanan-Nomor-17-Tahun-2014-tentang-Pelaksanaan-Pengadaan-Alat-Utama-Sistem-Senjata-di-lingkungan-Kementerian-Pertahanan-dan-Tentara-Nasional-Indonesia.pdf
 Indonesian National Police. Jakarta, 2015. ‘Regulation of the Chief of the Indonesian National Police No. 10/2015 concerning Guidelines and Procedures for Procurement of Special Materials Equipment Within the Indonesian National Police’. https://www.hukumonline.com/pusatdata/detail/lt58170fca5ca40/node/606/peraturan-kapolri-nomor-10-tahun-2015/
69b. Undue influence
Indonesia score: 75/100
There is a complete failure to investigate or prosecute, even in the face of clear evidence.
Cases are superficially investigated, or receive "show" hearings in which defendants are not punished.
Cases are investigated but not often prosecuted. There is clear undue influence in the decision making process.
Cases are investigated or prosecuted through formal processes, but undue political influence is attempted, and sometimes effective at derailing prosecutions.
Cases are investigated or prosecuted through formal processes and without undue political influence.
Of the three procurement cases tainted by corruption and brought to trial, there is only one in which undue political influence was apparent: the case of the AW101 procurement. Public opinion was divided about the case  and there were clear attempts to stir the debate, with the help of a self-proclaimed academic who justified the procurement. The way in which the government handled the situation was far from effective, as the statements issued by public officials, such as the Ministry of Defence, the Chief of TNI and the Chief of Air Force, tended to be contradictory . In August 2017, MP Supiadin Aries (from the government coalition parties Nasdem), publicly stated that the procurement followed the right procedure and questioned the Chief of TNI’s statement on the state’s losses because there is no such report by BPK . Even if there were no financial losses (a state audit later proved that these losses did exist), the procurement itself violated Law No. 16/2012, which is something that the MP should not have missed. Eventually, the mid-level officers (PPK officer) and brokers involved were charged, but the criminal proceedings failed to bring down the higher-level officers, who declined the KPK’s call under the pretext of keeping state secrets .
 Patricia Diah Ayu Saraswati, CNN Indonesia. February 19, 2017. ‘The purchase of AW101 helicopters is considered to be consistent with the Indonesian Air Force’s Strategic Plan’. Accessed July 20, 2019. https://www.cnnindonesia.com/nasional/20170219202856-20-194547/pembelian-heli-aw-101-dinilai-sesuai-rencana-strategis-tni-au
 Dylan Aprialdo Rachman, Kompas.com. July 7, 2019. ‘Difficulties in investigating the AW101 helicopter case, KPK seeks to re-call witnesses from the TNI’. Accessed July 20, 2019. https://nasional.kompas.com/read/2018/07/07/07411381/kesulitan-usut-kasus-heli-aw101-kpk-cari-cara-panggil-ulang-saksi-dari-tni
69c. Application of sanctions
Indonesia score: 75/100
It is not clear if offences result in sanctions.
Offences rarely result in sanctions.
Offences sometimes result in appropriate sanctions, but not on a regular basis.
An offence can regularly result in softer sanctions (e.g. administrative fines), but not prosecution or exclusion.
An offence can regularly result in a range of sanctions, including prosecution, exclusion from current and future competitions, or other sanctions, including heavy fines or imprisonment.
Throughout the current administration, there have been three procurement cases linked to corruption offences committed by military officers and brokers. All involved were brought to trial separately: the military officers were tried in military court, sentenced to life imprisonment  and forced to pay heavy fines, while the brokers were brought to trial and sent to prison . No harm was done to the supplier companies though, as they continue to operate and participate in other procurement bids as usual .
 Edward Febriyatri Kusuma, Detik.com. January 5, 2017. ‘Brigadier Teddy is sentenced to life imprisonment for corruption of the Main Equipment and Weapons Systems fund’. Accessed July 20, 2019. https://news.detik.com/berita/3388384/dihukum-seumur-hidup-ini-modus-brigjen-teddy-korupsi-dana-alusista
 Dylan Aprialdo Rachman, Kompas.com. March 1, 2019. ‘The journey of the Indonesian Maritime Security Agency (Bakamla) case, from the capture operation by the Corruption Eradication Commission (OTT KPK) to the Corruption of the Corporation’. Accessed July 20, 2019. https://nasional.kompas.com/read/2019/03/01/21023141/perjalanan-kasus-bakamla-dari-ott-kpk-hingga-dijeratnya-korporasi?page=all
 Interview with Interviewee 5: Former military personnel at Procurement Body (Baranahan) of Ministry of Defence (Kemhan), July 23, 2019, Jakarta, via phone.
Compare scores by country
Please view this page on a larger screen for the full stats.
|Country||69a. Sanctions||69b. Undue influence||69c. Application of sanctions|
|Albania||100 / 100||50 / 100||0 / 100|
|Algeria||100 / 100||50 / 100||0 / 100|
|Angola||100 / 100||50 / 100||0 / 100|
|Argentina||100 / 100||50 / 100||0 / 100|
|Armenia||100 / 100||75 / 100||100 / 100|
|Australia||50 / 100||75 / 100||25 / 100|
|Azerbaijan||50 / 100||0 / 100||0 / 100|
|Bahrain||0 / 100||NA||NA|
|Bangladesh||50 / 100||NEI||NEI|
|Belgium||75 / 100||100 / 100||NEI|
|Bosnia and Herzegovina||100 / 100||0 / 100||NEI|
|Botswana||100 / 100||50 / 100||NEI|
|Brazil||50 / 100||75 / 100||75 / 100|
|Burkina Faso||100 / 100||25 / 100||25 / 100|
|Cameroon||0 / 100||NA||NA|
|Canada||100 / 100||75 / 100||100 / 100|
|Chile||75 / 100||NEI||NEI|
|China||100 / 100||50 / 100||25 / 100|
|Colombia||50 / 100||50 / 100||100 / 100|
|Cote d'Ivoire||100 / 100||100 / 100||100 / 100|
|Denmark||100 / 100||100 / 100||100 / 100|
|Egypt||0 / 100||NA||NA|
|Estonia||100 / 100||100 / 100||100 / 100|
|Finland||100 / 100||100 / 100||NEI|
|France||75 / 100||100 / 100||75 / 100|
|Germany||100 / 100||75 / 100||75 / 100|
|Ghana||100 / 100||50 / 100||0 / 100|
|Greece||100 / 100||75 / 100||100 / 100|
|Hungary||100 / 100||50 / 100||50 / 100|
|India||50 / 100||75 / 100||100 / 100|
|Indonesia||100 / 100||75 / 100||75 / 100|
|Iran||0 / 100||NA||NA|
|Iraq||25 / 100||50 / 100||0 / 100|
|Israel||100 / 100||75 / 100||50 / 100|
|Italy||100 / 100||75 / 100||100 / 100|
|Japan||100 / 100||100 / 100||100 / 100|
|Jordan||0 / 100||NA||NA|
|Kenya||75 / 100||NEI||50 / 100|
|Kosovo||100 / 100||75 / 100||25 / 100|
|Kuwait||0 / 100||NA||NA|
|Latvia||100 / 100||100 / 100||NEI|
|Lebanon||100 / 100||0 / 100||0 / 100|
|Lithuania||50 / 100||100 / 100||75 / 100|
|Malaysia||25 / 100||75 / 100||50 / 100|
|Mali||50 / 100||25 / 100||25 / 100|
|Mexico||50 / 100||0 / 100||75 / 100|
|Montenegro||75 / 100||0 / 100||0 / 100|
|Morocco||0 / 100||NA||NA|
|Myanmar||0 / 100||NA||NA|
|Netherlands||100 / 100||50 / 100||NEI|
|New Zealand||100 / 100||100 / 100||NEI|
|Niger||100 / 100||0 / 100||0 / 100|
|Nigeria||NEI||50 / 100||0 / 100|
|North Macedonia||50 / 100||75 / 100||100 / 100|
|Norway||100 / 100||100 / 100||100 / 100|
|Oman||0 / 100||NA||NA|
|Palestine||100 / 100||50 / 100||25 / 100|
|Philippines||100 / 100||50 / 100||0 / 100|
|Poland||100 / 100||75 / 100||25 / 100|
|Portugal||50 / 100||100 / 100||75 / 100|
|Qatar||0 / 100||NA||NA|
|Russia||100 / 100||75 / 100||75 / 100|
|Saudi Arabia||0 / 100||NA||NA|
|Serbia||50 / 100||100 / 100||0 / 100|
|Singapore||100 / 100||100 / 100||75 / 100|
|South Africa||75 / 100||25 / 100||75 / 100|
|South Korea||100 / 100||100 / 100||100 / 100|
|South Sudan||100 / 100||NEI||0 / 100|
|Spain||50 / 100||NEI||50 / 100|
|Sudan||0 / 100||NA||0 / 100|
|Sweden||100 / 100||100 / 100||100 / 100|
|Switzerland||50 / 100||NEI||NEI|
|Taiwan||100 / 100||100 / 100||75 / 100|
|Tanzania||100 / 100||25 / 100||0 / 100|
|Thailand||50 / 100||0 / 100||0 / 100|
|Tunisia||100 / 100||75 / 100||50 / 100|
|Turkey||50 / 100||25 / 100||25 / 100|
|Uganda||100 / 100||25 / 100||50 / 100|
|Ukraine||50 / 100||25 / 100||75 / 100|
|United Arab Emirates||0 / 100||NA||NA|
|United Kingdom||100 / 100||100 / 100||25 / 100|
|United States||100 / 100||100 / 100||75 / 100|
|Venezuela||50 / 100||0 / 100||0 / 100|
|Zimbabwe||100 / 100||75 / 100||NEI|