Jakarta, hitclubapk3 Indonesia
—
Chairman of the Rospita Board of Commissioners Vici Paulyn Rospita grilled representatives from UGM to the Solo City KPU in a public information dispute hearing related to
Joko Widodo diploma
(Jokowi) which was held at the Central Information Commission, Jakarta, Monday (17/11).
The petitioner in the trial was Leony Lidya with the respondents being UGM, the Indonesian KPU, the DKI Jakarta KPU, the Surakarta KPU, and the Metro Jaya Police.
At the start of the hearing Rospita Vici Paulyn asked about the whereabouts of a number of documents that had been requested from UGM.One of them is the original diploma of the 7th President Jokowi.
ADVERTISEMENT
SCROLL TO CONTINUE WITH CONTENT
“UGM stated that the original diploma is not in the possession of the person concerned, a copy of the original diploma is not in the possession, currently in the possession of the Polda Metro Jaya for legal proceedings, there is none
photocopy
at all a copy of the diploma?”So when it was handed over to the Regional Police, UGM didn’t have a copy at all?”Rospita asked.
“What we handed over to the Regional Police is the original copy,” answered the UGM representative.
Rospita also asked whether UGM had another copy of Jokowi’s diploma.
“Aren’t there any other photocopies?”Rospita asked.
“Photo
scans
Of course there is,” answered the UGM representative
Rospita again asked about the existence of another document, namely a transcript of Jokowi’s grades during college.
“Is there a copy of the grade transcript? Because the answer is that it is not in control, it is currently in possession for legal proceedings. Is there a copy other than the one given to the Regional Police?”Rospita asked.
“Copy
scans
I think we have it,” answered the UGM representative.
“Don’t think, is there or not?”said Rospita.
“There are those who know more details about the Faculty PPID,” answered the UGM representative.
Rospita also asked about the whereabouts of Jokowi’s study plan card (KRS) and Study Results Card (KHS).
UGM stated that it did not have a KRS document but had a KHS.
“There is no (KRS) and we have tried in such a way. We have confirmed with the faculty and there is none, because at that time, KRS was provided by students and supervisors,” said the UGM representative.
Another document asked by Rospita was Jokowi’s real work study (KKN) report.
“There is no KKN report, but then there is a grade report from the supervisor and we have submitted it to Polda Metro,” said the UGM representative.
“Final assignment report or thesis?”Rospita asked.
“It exists,” answered the UGM representative.
“But here the answer is not in control? asked Rospita.
“Because the fact is that it is currently being handed over to the Regional Police,” answered UGM.
“So actually the answer is ‘not under control,’ because this is the information, all of them are UGM products, meaning they are under UGM control.”But the way to answer is that it is currently in the process of another dispute at Polda Metro Jaya,” said Rospita.
“The notion of not being in control is a product of other institutions, which are not at UGM, that is.”Now the meaning is biased,” he added.
Surakarta KPU questioned
Rospita also questioned representatives of the Surakarta KPU in the trial.
“Then the date and agenda number enter the diploma number into the KPU during the registration process,” asked Rospita.
The Surakarta KPU stated that the document had been destroyed.
“That is in accordance with the JRA (archive retention schedule) of our agenda book, destroyed, ma’am, in accordance with the archive retention schedule,” said the Surakarta KPU representative
“How long is the retention period for archive storage?”Rospita asked.
“If the agenda book is according to PKPU 17 of 2023, it is one year active, two years inactive,” said the Surakarta KPU representative.
Rospita was also surprised about the KPU’s answer.According to him, the destruction of archives should refer to the Archives Law.
“One year of archive storage?one year?Certain?”You should refer to the Archives Law for a minimum of five years, one year for archives to be destroyed,” said Rospita.
KPU representatives insisted that this was in accordance with PKPU.
“That’s a state document
you know
, there is such a thing as a dynamic archive, so as long as it is still potentially disputed, it should not be destroyed.So you don’t have the documents at the moment?” Rospita asked.
“It is no longer controlled,” answered the Surakarta KPU.
Explanation of the Chairman of the KPU
The KPU of Surakarta City clarified the news that Jokowi’s registration files had been destroyed when his retention age was only one year.
This news emerged after the Surakarta KPU attended the Public Information Openness (KIP) hearing, Tuesday (18/11).
The chairman of the Solo City KPU, Yustinus Arya Artheswara, admitted that his party had said that the files requested by the applicant had been destroyed.In accordance with KPU Regulation number 17 of 2023, several types of archives have a retention schedule of 1 year active and two years inactive.
However, Arya explained that the files destroyed were not Jokowi’s registration files.
“So what is meant is not that his (Jokowi’s) diploma files were destroyed,” said Arya, Wednesday (19/11).
(yoa/syd/wis)
[Gambas:hitclubapk3 Video]
