Normative Model for SOE Procurement Contract Disclosure as a Corruption Prevention Strategy in Indonesia

Andi Wahyu Wibisana

doi:10.59261/jlsp.v4i3.156

Authors

Andi Wahyu Wibisana Universitas Pancasila

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.59261/jlsp.v4i3.156

Keywords:

Procurement Corruption, Contract Openness, Public Information Disclosure, SOE Governance

Abstract

Background: Procurement corruption in Indonesian state-owned enterprises (SOEs) persists through contract manipulation practices, including mark-ups, directed tendering, fictitious entities, and engineered contract addenda. Although Article 33 of the 1945 Constitution and existing laws uphold the principles of transparency and accountability, no operational regulation currently requires SOEs to proactively disclose procurement contracts, addenda, and implementation reports.

Objective: This study develops a normative model for SOE procurement contract disclosure as a pre-emptive and systemic strategy for corruption prevention.

Methods: This dogmatic normative legal research applies statutory, conceptual, case-based, and comparative approaches. It examines the 1945 Constitution, the SOE Law, the Anti-Corruption Law, the Public Information Disclosure Law, SOE procurement regulations, Information Commission decisions, selected corruption cases involving PLN, Merpati, Pelindo II, and Amarta Karya, as well as international open-contracting standards. The analysis maps legal norms, identifies regulatory gaps, examines fraud patterns, and constructs a model based on Fraud Diamond Theory.

Results: The study identifies a gap between transparency principles and enforceable disclosure obligations, enabling contractual secrecy that increases opportunities for fraud and strengthens perpetrators’ capabilities. The proposed model requires the disclosure of principal contracts and addenda, proactive publication through standardized electronic platforms, proportionate protection of legitimate trade secrets through consequence tests, independent verification mechanisms, and graduated administrative sanctions linked to the performance of SOE organs.

Conclusion: Procurement contract disclosure should be institutionalized as a binding preventive instrument to strengthen public oversight, mitigate procurement fraud risks, and realize economic democracy as mandated by Article 33 of the 1945 Constitution.

References

Amuzat, O. (2025). Combating procurement fraud in the public sector. Modern Anthology in Education, Administration, Science, and Technology, 24–38.

Aouabed, C. (2025). The principle of procedural transparency in light of the developments of Law No. 23-12 defining the general rules on public procurement and corruption prevention. Journal of Law and Sustainable Development, 13(4), e04386. https://doi.org/10.55908/sdgs.v13i4.4386

Ariffin, T. B. B., & Renaldy, R. (2023). Meningkatkan peranan perusahaan BUMN yang sudah go publik dalam mengoptimalkan pengelolaan bisnis berbasis budaya dan kepastian hukum. Audi Et AP: Jurnal Penelitian Hukum, 2(1), 36–43. https://doi.org/10.24967/jaeap.v2i01.2079

Batista, D. A. (2024). Enhancing transparency and accountability in public procurement: Exploring blockchain technology to mitigate records fraud. Records Management Journal, 34(2/3), 151–170. https://doi.org/10.1108/RMJ-10-2023-0054

Bayked, E. M., Menelik, M. M., Toleha, H. N., Workneh, B. D., Wendie, T. F., & Kahissay, M. H. (2024). Transparency and corruption risk in pharmaceutical procurement practices at public health facilities in Northeast Ethiopia: A multi-facility study. Journal of Pharmaceutical Policy and Practice, 17(1), 2432446. https://doi.org/10.1080/20523211.2024.2432446

Budiawan, W. (2024). Transparency in the preparation of terms of reference in the goods and services procurement system in BUMN. Journal of Law, Politic and Humanities, 5(1), 436–444. https://doi.org/10.38035/jlph.v5i1.787

Chimonaki, C., Papadakis, S., & Lemonakis, C. (2023). Perspectives in fraud theories – A systematic review approach. F1000Research, 12, 933. https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.131896.1

Corona, C., & Kim, T. W. (2024). Contract disclosure under external scrutiny. The Accounting Review, 99(2), 169–194. https://doi.org/10.2308/TAR-2020-0717

Dandi, M. (2026). The displacement problem: Why digitalising public procurement relocates corruption rather than removing it. Governance and Fraud Journal, 1(1), 9–15.

Di Porto, F. (2023). Algorithmic disclosure rules. Artificial Intelligence and Law, 31(1), 13–51.

Djuniarsono, R., Roestamy, M., & Suhartini, E. (2023). Privatisasi BUMN sebagai pilar perekonomian nasional dalam perspektif hukum bisnis. Jurnal Ilmiah Living Law, 15(1), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.30997/jill.v15i1.7931

Duguay, R., Rauter, T., & Samuels, D. (2023). The impact of open data on public procurement. Journal of Accounting Research, 61(4), 1159–1224. https://doi.org/10.1111/1475-679X.12479

Ernawati, E., Suhariningsih, S., Kusumadara, A., & Santoso, B. (2023). Aligning State-Owned Enterprises with constitutional values: The case of Indonesian BUMN holding companies. Ascarya: Journal of Islamic Science, Culture and Social Studies, 3(2), 141–150. https://doi.org/10.53754/iscs.v3i2.639

Fadel, N., Askafi, E., & Mutiara, N. (2026). Internal Government Audit Supervision Model For Fraud Control In Public Procurement: Evidence From Kediri City Government. Jurnal Apresiasi Ekonomi, 14(2), 561–569.

Fontana, S., & d’Agostino, G. (2025). Threshold of shadows: Unveiling organised crime in Italian municipal public procurement. European Journal of Political Economy, 102752.

Gallego, J., Rivero, G., & Martínez, J. (2021). Preventing rather than punishing: An early warning model of malfeasance in public procurement. International Journal of Forecasting, 37(1), 360–377. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijforecast.2020.06.006

Hardiyan, S. P. (2023). Perspektif hukum dalam keterbukaan, transparansi, proporsional, dan penegakan hukum pada kontrak pengadaan barang dan jasa pemerintah. Perspektif Hukum, 23(2), 262–283. https://doi.org/10.30649/ph.v23i2.260

Herandi, Y., & Bouzarjomehri, H. (2026). Enhancing Transparency in the Public Pharmaceutical Sector to Reduce Corruption While Increasing Trust: A Policy Brief for a Developing Country. Health Technology Assessment in Action.

Humphrey, E. A., Enofe, A. O., & Ehigie, I. P. (2023). Fraud Diamond: Detecting fraudulent behaviours in a firm. Journal of Corporate Governance Research, 7(1), 31–46. https://doi.org/10.5296/jcgr.v7i1.20405

Kamal, M., & Elim, J. (2021). The strategy to optimize the role of Government Internal Supervisory Apparatus (APIP) in procurement fraud risk management in Industry 4.0. Jurnal Tata Kelola Dan Akuntabilitas Keuangan Negara, 7(2), 151–168. https://doi.org/10.28986/jtaken.v7i2.588

Kohler, J. C., & Dimancesco, D. (2020). The risk of corruption in public pharmaceutical procurement: How anti-corruption, transparency and accountability measures may reduce this risk. Global Health Action, 13(sup1), 1694745. https://doi.org/10.1080/16549716.2019.1694745

Kon, Z. S., Lim, Y.-H., Choong, Y.-O., Paloosamy, J. R., & Low, B. T. (2024). The influence of pressure on intention to commit fraud: The mediating role of rationalization and opportunities. Asian Journal of Business Ethics, 13(1), 175–195. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13520-024-00192-x

Lopes, C. S. A., & Romão, A. L. (2021). A contratação pública como instrumento para a transparência e concorrência das compras públicas em Portugal. New Trends in Qualitative Research, 9, 267–277. https://doi.org/10.36367/ntqr.9.2021.267-277

Marselina, P. P., & Astariyani, N. L. G. (2025). Normative conflict between the State Finance Law and the State-Owned Enterprises Law regarding the status of separated state assets. West Science Interdisciplinary Studies, 3(08), 1389–1395. https://doi.org/10.58812/wsis.v3i08.2189

Nemec, P., ?uricová, V., & Kubak, M. (2023). Institutions, corruption and transparency in effective healthcare public procurement: Evidence from Central and Eastern Europe. Post-Communist Economies, 35(6), 619–646. https://doi.org/10.1080/14631377.2023.2213465

Rohmaniyah, S. M., & Tarjo. (2020). Dissect fraud of planning and bidding for procurement of goods and service. International Journal of Managerial Studies and Research, 8(11), 26–33. https://doi.org/10.20431/2349-0349.0811004

Sgrò, F. (2021). Transparency and accountability of the Italian public administration in the context of public procurement: The case of below-threshold contracts. In P. Mikuli & G. Kuca (Eds.), Accountability and the Law: Rights, Authority and Transparency of Public Power (pp. 174–192). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003168331-13

Silveira, M. A. C. da. (2026). Contratação pública: os mecanismos de transparência e controlo social no Brasil e em Portugal.

Siregar, H., Nababan, R., Habeahan, B., & Gulo, B. F. (2025). Resolution of disputes on disclosure of public information: Judicial approach through adjudication and litigation based on Law Number 14 of 2008 concerning openness of public information. Golden Ratio of Law and Social Policy Review, 4(2), 42–47. https://doi.org/10.52970/grlspr.v4i2.928

Solechan, Sonhaji, & Wibawa, K. C. S. (2024). Enhancing information transparency for effective governance: A study on government procurement in Indonesia. Pakistan Journal of Criminology, 16(2), 873–886. https://doi.org/10.62271/pjc.16.2.873.886

Sopian, S., Yustiana, S., & Prabowo, M. (2025). The role of external auditors in mediating the relationship between internal audit and sustainable procurement. Jurnal Akuntansi, Ekonomi Dan Manajemen Bisnis, 13(1), 165–177. https://doi.org/10.30871/jaemb.v13i1.9156

Wiraguna, M. A., & Hidayah, A. (2024). Prinsip Good Corporate Governance dalam pengelolaan Badan Usaha Milik Negara perspektif hukum bisnis. Solusi, 22(1), 127–136. https://doi.org/10.36546/solusi.v22i1.1500