1 / 19

KPK’s E xperience in Using IT for Evidence Gathering & Analysis

KPK’s E xperience in Using IT for Evidence Gathering & Analysis. AT A GLANCE. Established in December 2003 Independent from the Executive, Legislative, Judiciary and any other powers Responsible to the Public Financially, KPK is audited by the Indonesian Supreme Audit Board‏

sarah-dejesus
Download Presentation

KPK’s E xperience in Using IT for Evidence Gathering & Analysis

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. KPK’s Experience in Using IT for Evidence Gathering & Analysis

  2. AT A GLANCE • Established in December 2003 • Independent from the Executive, Legislative, Judiciary and any other powers • Responsible to the Public • Financially, KPK is audited by the Indonesian Supreme Audit Board‏ • Lead by 5 commissioners

  3. THE KPK’S DUTIES

  4. Background

  5. Law Number 30 year 2002 Article 44: “Preliminary evidence is considered to positively identify a corrupt act if at least two material evidence has been discovered, including but not limited to information or data that is uttered, sent, accepted, or kept electronically optically, or normally New challenges need new regulation

  6. Investigator authority based on Indonesian Law on Criminal Procedure: • To take the first steps at the place of occurrence • To order a suspect to stop and examine the suspect’s identification • To carry out arrest, detention, search and seizure Gathering the evidence

  7. Search and seizure Paradigm shift

  8. Problems: • Authentication • Volatility of evidence • Very easy to be altered Handling the evidence in the correct maner Produce digital fingerprint ( i.e MD S HASH ) Support the investigator in analyzing the evidences (i.e network analysis, extract, and cloning the data ) Information Processing and Analysis and digital forensic Handling the digital evidence

  9. We include that digital fingerprint in our affidavit when we seize the evidence This policy is taken to strengthen the validity of the evidence. Thus, the validity of the evidence can be tested by everyone pre

  10. Indonesia is adopting continental law which means that the domination of the judge during the trial is significant. We have experienced challenges when we brought case which have many digital evidences. The judge questioned the validity of the evidences. • KPK brought expert witness to the court to explain the validity of the evidence and the standard of digital evidence handling. • To provide the information that we gain from the digital evidence into affidavit. Presenting the evidence in court

  11. Occured in 2004–2007 • Committed by a company namely ALT Co &CEO of State Electricity Company (in Surabaya Branch) namely HS • Have caused state loss of IDR175.000.674.815(USD17,500,000) Case Example:Corruption in State Electrical Company

  12. LAMPUNG SURABAYA HS CEO In the end 2003, HS transferred to the state electricity company branch surabaya as CEO In 2003 state electricity company (in Sumatera branch) has contract with ALT Co to establish Customer Management System (CMS) ALT Co which was represented by SAM, GK and FZ, offered HS a proposal to establish CMS in surabaya. They also offered HS benefit sharing from the project Existing CMS HS agreed the proposal even though he knew there was existing CMS in SURABAYA Case Overview HS and his staff facillitated ALT Co by making false procurement ALT Co and programmer of existing CMS made an agreement that ALT Co will use the existing CMS. The existing CMS also claimed as a product of ALT company ALT company

  13. HS SAM FZ GK EXISTING CMS OWNER Search and Seizure SURABAYA (East Java) Investigation Process LAMPUNG (South Sumatera) ALT Co

  14. Investigators found that ALT Co. did notmake/perform any project/work relating with the CMS Project in Surabaya • Further investigation found that HS, through his spouse, has been received bribe from ALT Co. • It is proved that HS has received Rp 1.225.000.000 (USD122.500) from ALT Co. for the project INVESTIGATION RESULT

  15. Evidence (Email): Digital Evidence This proves an intention to give kickback to HS and other officials in the company..

  16. Digital evidences A false procurement bid..

  17. 8 years imprisonment and a fine ofIDR 6.500.000.000 (USD650,000) HS 4 years imprisonment and a fine ofIDR150.000.000 (USD150,000) SAM Fined of Rp 47.101.910.881,01 (USD4,710,100) VERDICT ALT co

  18. Changes in technology have brought a lot of challenges • Traditional vs Modern Investigation Techniques • How to utilise IT and other means to obtain evidence? • How to provide such evidence in the court for trial? CONCLUSION

More Related