A new corruption case has shocked the nation. This time, it was not an obvious theft of public funds. Instead, officials exploited governance loopholes. The misconduct appeared legal because it followed formal procedures. This pattern, however, is not new.
In the first century BCE, the Roman governor Gaius Verres abused his authority in Sicily. He used state power for personal gain. Centuries later, Chinese records described officials manipulating taxes and logistics for private benefit. During the Ottoman decline, political patronage and the sale of offices weakened meritocracy.
These cases occurred in different eras and places. Yet they reveal the same problem. People often turn public trust into personal advantage.
Modern states emerged partly to address this issue. Public resources are no longer managed by kings alone. They are governed through laws, procedures, and oversight.
Yet the problem never disappeared. What changed was the environment. Abuse now occurs within complex bureaucracies.
Modern governments have detailed regulations and extensive procedures. These systems aim to prevent misconduct. Ironically, abuse often hides behind those very procedures.
Today, corruption is harder to detect. Programs operate normally. Documents appear complete. Processes seem legal. Only later do investigators discover private gains hidden within public systems.
The recent case follows this pattern. The problem was not a lack of law. It was the exploitation of governance gaps. A program was designed and implemented. Everything appeared administratively valid. Everything appeared administratively valid. Yet the outcome benefited certain groups while harming the public.
In Anti-Corruption jurisprudence, this is classified as jinayah kubra (major crime). Such corruption damages public rights. It weakens justice from within government institutions.
Because of its impact, Anti-Corruption jurisprudence supports severe ta’zir penalties. When linked with fasad (social destruction), sanctions can be extremely strict. It varies from death sentence to exilement.
Fiqh of Governance
However, harsh punishment alone is not enough. History shows that corruption often survives despite severe penalties. The deeper problem is governance failure. Systems sometimes allow misconduct to grow unnoticed. For this reason, Muhammadiyah developed Fikih Tata Kelola (Fiqh of Governance). This framework explains how governance can prevent corruption from the start.
Fikih Tata Kelola rests on a simple principle. Good governance requires both ethical people and effective systems. Neither is sufficient alone. Muhammadiyah divides governance principles into two areas: human resources and institutional systems.
Individual Level
The first principle is amanah (trustworthiness).Public office is a trust, not a privilege. Corruption begins when officials stop seeing their positions as responsibilities.
The second principle is accountability. Every leader will answer for their actions. Administrative procedures cannot erase accountability before Allah.
The third principle is exemplary leadership. Public officials shape organizational culture. Integrity encourages integrity. Misconduct encourages more misconduct. Repeated corruption often signals a cultural problem.
The fourth principle is long-term vision. Leaders should think beyond immediate interests. Corruption reflects the opposite mindset. It seeks short-term gain while creating long-term harm. Future generations often bear the costs.
System Level
Fiqh of Governance also emphasizes institutional quality. Even good people can fall within bad systems. Key governance principles include: accountability, transparency, oversight, consultation, justice, equality, efficiency, and merit-based recruitment.
Accountability requires clear authority and responsibility. Corruption thrives when responsibility becomes unclear. Transparency allows public scrutiny. Closed processes create opportunities for abuse.
Oversight operates on three levels: divine accountability, legal and institutional controls, and public participation. These layers reinforce one another. When one weakens, corruption becomes easier.
Consultation prevents decisions from serving narrow interests. Justice ensures fair rewards and penalties. Equality means no one stands above the law.
Public office should not provide legal immunity. Healthy recruitment is especially important. The Quran emphasizes strength and trustworthiness in leadership. Positions should be filled through meritocracy (based on competence and integrity).
Personal loyalty should not outweigh professional ability. When favoritism dominates recruitment, governance weakens.
Recent corruption cases reveal deeper failures. The issue is not merely individual misconduct. It also reflects weaknesses in trust, accountability, leadership, oversight, and recruitment.
Therefore, fighting corruption requires more than legal prosecution. Society must improve both personal integrity and institutional governance. Only then can similar abuses be prevented from recurring.
References:
Council for Religious Opinion and Reform of the Central Board of Muhammadiyah, Fikih Antikorupsi: Perspektif Ulama Muhammadiyah, Yogyakarta: Pusat Studi Agarna dan Peradaban (PSAP), 2006.
The Central Board of Muhammadiyah, “Fikih Tata Kelola”, in Berita Resmi Muhammadiyah: No. 06/2010-2015/Ramadhan 1435 H/July 2014 M, Yogyakarta: Gramasurya, 2014.
