Komisi Pemberantasan Korupsi: Redesigning Access to Corruption Intelligence

An Anticorruption Agency Buried Under Its Own Information

The Komisi Pemberantasan Korupsi (KPK)—Indonesia's independent anticorruption commission—held critical information that journalists, lawyers, civil society, and ordinary citizens needed: court trial schedules, case details, call center contacts, investigation updates, and enforcement records. But the website that housed this information was a maze.

Menus were nested illogically. Important features like trial schedules were hidden several clicks deep. The call center number wasn't immediately visible. Search didn't work intuitively. A journalist chasing a court date or a citizen wanting to report corruption had to navigate friction that obscured the very transparency the KPK was mandated to provide.

This was a paradox: an agency dedicated to fighting corruption was failing to make its most essential information easy to access. By 2021, the KPK recognized that the website wasn't just poorly organized—it was undermining the organization's credibility and reach. A redesign wasn't a luxury. It was essential infrastructure for the KPK's mission.

Why Government Information Sites Fail Citizens

The KPK website's problems ran deeper than messy navigation. They reflected systemic challenges in how government organizations approach digital presence.

1. Information was organized by internal agency structure, not citizen needs.

The website mirrored the KPK's organizational chart: divisions, departments, and units each had their own sections. A citizen searching for "how to report corruption" might find it under "Public Education," "Complaints," "Strategic Communications," or nowhere at all.

Internal organization made sense to KPK staff who knew the institution. It made no sense to citizens. The website reflected how the KPK was structured, not how people actually looked for information.

1. Critical information was buried or assumed to be common knowledge.

Trial schedules—arguably the single most important piece of information the KPK provided—required clicking through multiple menus. The call center number wasn't on the homepage. Instructions for reporting corruption were hidden in a subsection. The assumption was that regular users would already know these sections existed.

This was a classic expert bias: the people maintaining the website knew the KPK's structure intimately, so they assumed everyone else did too. In reality, most visitors were arriving for the first time, searching for specific information, and getting lost.

1. The website was designed for breadth, not usability.

Thousands of pages existed on the KPK website: case files, legal documents, reports, news articles, educational materials. But the site structure didn't help users navigate this volume. There was no clear hierarchy of importance. Everything felt equally prominent (or equally buried).

A visitor couldn't tell whether a page was critical or supplementary. A journalist looking for a specific court date had to search through the same interface used to browse decades of historical documents.

1. User research was missing from the design process.

The original site was built based on assumptions about what information was important and how people would use it. But no one had actually observed how journalists, citizens, lawyers, or NGOs interacted with the site. User feedback wasn't systematically collected or acted upon.

Without research, the redesign risked repeating the same mistakes in a new package: making things look prettier while keeping the underlying structure confusing.

Redesigning for Clarity, Not Aesthetics

Suitmedia's approach started with user research and information architecture—not visual design.

Foundational Research Methods That Shaped the Redesign

1. User interviews with actual visitors and stakeholders.

Suitmedia conducted interviews with journalists (who used the site to track cases), lawyers (who needed case documents and trial schedules), civil society organizations (who used KPK data for advocacy), and ordinary citizens (who wanted to report corruption or learn about cases).

Each group had different needs. Journalists needed trial schedules, court locations, and case summaries. Lawyers needed full case files and legal documents. Citizens needed simple, clear reporting instructions. The website had to serve all these needs without becoming overwhelming.

1. Task-based usability testing.

Instead of asking users "What do you think of the website?", Suitmedia gave them specific tasks: "Find the trial schedule for case X," "Find the phone number to report corruption," "Download the court verdict for case Y."

Watching users attempt these tasks revealed where the site failed. A user searching for "trial schedule" might end up in four different sections, each with partial information. A user trying to report corruption would abandon the task because instructions were buried in a PDF three clicks deep.

1. Analytics analysis and search query patterns.

The existing website had data: which pages got traffic, what users searched for, where they dropped off. This data revealed disconnects between how the KPK organized information and how users looked for it.

Users searched for "corruption reporting" 300 times per month, but the reporting form was categorized under "Complaints" in the navigation. Users searched for "KPK trial schedule" constantly, but that information was scattered across three different pages. The gap between user language and site structure was clear.

Building Information Architecture for Multiple Audiences

Instead of reorganizing by internal divisions, Suitmedia restructured the site around user needs and information priority.

Key Changes to Information Hierarchy and Navigation

1. Homepage redesign with immediate access to critical information.

The new homepage didn't hide trial schedules or the call center number. They were visible above the fold, in a dedicated section. A citizen or journalist arriving at the site could find what they needed in seconds.

The homepage also featured a clear hierarchy: "Report Corruption Now" was prominent, case statistics were visible, and upcoming trials were displayed. The layout communicated what the KPK actually did: investigate corruption, prosecute offenders, and accept reports.

1. A new "Cases" section organized by status, not by internal division.

Instead of burying cases in departmental pages, Suitmedia created a unified "Cases" portal organized by status: "Under Investigation," "In Court," "Convicted," "Acquitted." Users could browse cases by status, search by defendant name or case type, and access full information without jumping between sections.

This required reclassifying thousands of existing case records—a data architecture challenge. But it transformed the user experience from "Where is this case?" to "Tell me about cases I'm interested in."

1. Simplified reporting flow with clear step-by-step instructions.

Reporting corruption had become a multi-click journey through PDFs and forms. Suitmedia redesigned this as a clear, linear process: "Step 1: Choose how to report (online/phone/visit office)," "Step 2: Gather information about the alleged corruption," "Step 3: Submit your report and track status."

The instructions were written in plain language, not legal jargon. Visual callouts highlighted contact information. A citizen reading the instructions should feel confident, not confused.

1. A dedicated "For Journalists" section with filters and export options.

Journalists had specific needs: case updates, trial schedules, press releases, and quotable statistics. Instead of forcing journalists to navigate the same interface as general visitors, Suitmedia created a section tailored to their workflow.

Journalists could filter by case type, defendant, or trial date. They could download case summaries as PDFs. They could subscribe to case updates via email. The section communicated: "We understand what you need, and we've built this for you."

1. A searchable knowledge base with FAQs and educational content.

The KPK provided educational content (what is corruption, how to prevent it, legal frameworks), but it was scattered across disconnected pages. Suitmedia consolidated this into a searchable knowledge base with clear categories.

A citizen asking "What counts as corruption?" or "What happens after I report?" would find clear, authoritative answers. The knowledge base reduced repeated inquiries to the call center and provided self-service information access.

User Experience as Information Design

The redesign wasn't just about reorganizing content. It was about redesigning how information was presented and discovered.

1. Search was rebuilt from the ground up.

The original search was a basic keyword matcher—useful if you knew the exact term but useless if you searched casually. The new search understood synonyms, variations in phrasing, and context.

A user searching "how to report graft" would find reporting instructions. A user searching "corruption hotline" would find the call center. A journalist searching "case 001" would find the specific trial. The search learned from actual user queries and improved over time.

1. Navigation was simplified to a three-level maximum.

The original site had nested menus five or six levels deep. The new navigation followed a rule: no more than three clicks to reach any important page. Critical information (trial schedules, reporting) was one click from the homepage.

This constraint forced hard decisions about what information was truly essential. Pages that didn't fit the hierarchy were either consolidated, deleted, or made accessible through search. The result was a leaner, faster site that didn't overwhelm visitors with options.

1. Visual hierarchy communicated information priority.

Large headlines for critical tasks (Report Corruption Now), clear status indicators on cases (Investigation / Court / Convicted), and color-coded sections made information scannable. A visitor to the homepage could instantly understand what the KPK did and what actions they could take.

Visual design wasn't decoration—it was information architecture. Every color, size, and position communicated priority and relationship.

1. Mobile optimization wasn't an afterthought—it was the design baseline.

By 2021, many visitors would access the site on phones. Suitmedia designed the layout for mobile first, then expanded it for larger screens. Touch targets were large enough to tap reliably. Forms were short and mobile-friendly. Images optimized for mobile networks.

A citizen calling the corruption hotline and trying to access reporting instructions on their phone should have a seamless experience. Mobile access couldn't be a degraded version of the desktop site.

Execution: From Research to Redesigned System

The transition from old to new had to be managed carefully. The KPK couldn't shut down the old site while the new one was under construction.

1. Content audit and migration happened in parallel.

Suitmedia conducted a complete inventory of the existing website: thousands of pages, documents, and records. Each piece was evaluated: Is this still relevant? Does it fit the new structure? Can it be consolidated with other content?

Some pages were archived. Others were rewritten for clarity. Many were consolidated into unified case pages or knowledge base articles. This content work was invisible to users but critical to success—the new site couldn't just rearrange old content. It had to be cleaned, updated, and reorganized.

1. User testing iterated the design before launch.

Before the redesign went live, Suitmedia conducted multiple rounds of usability testing with real users. Journalists tested the case search. Citizens tested the reporting flow. Lawyers tested the document access.

Each round revealed problems: a search filter that didn't work intuitively, a reporting form that wasn't clear, a page load that was too slow. The design was refined based on feedback, then tested again. This iterative process reduced the risk of launching a redesign that sounded good but didn't work in practice.

1. The launch was phased, not a sudden cutover.

The new site launched as the primary experience, but the old site remained accessible as a backup. Users encountering problems could still find information through the old interface. This reduced the risk that a redesign would break critical access to information.

Monitoring during the first weeks captured any unexpected issues. If a particular search query wasn't working well, it was fixed immediately. If users were still visiting the old site looking for a specific feature, that feature was highlighted on the new site.

Access, Transparency, and Institutional Credibility

The redesigned KPK website launched in 2022 and achieved results that went beyond improved navigation.

1. Information access improved measurably.

Journalists reported finding information faster. Citizens completed reporting forms without calling the call center for clarification. Lawyers accessed case documents directly instead of requesting them. The website was doing its job: providing information efficiently.

Task completion rates increased. Search bounce rates decreased. Most importantly, the time users spent searching for information dropped significantly. A journalist who previously spent 15 minutes finding a trial schedule could now find it in 30 seconds.

1. The website became a trust signal for transparency.

A well-organized, user-friendly KPK website communicated something important: this institution is open, accessible, and has nothing to hide. Citizens could easily verify case information. Journalists could track investigations without gatekeeping.

This wasn't just better UX. It was institutional messaging. The website became evidence of the KPK's commitment to transparency—something the organization had always claimed but the old site contradicted through its opacity.

1. Usage patterns revealed new information needs.

With cleaner analytics and better tracking, the KPK could see which features were actually used and what users were searching for. Trial schedules got 10x more traffic after being moved to the homepage. The "Report Corruption" form saw increased submissions after the reporting process was simplified.

These metrics weren't just success measures. They were feedback signals that guided ongoing improvements. The website became a tool for understanding citizen needs and institutional effectiveness.

1. The redesign enabled institutional learning.

The new information architecture forced the KPK to think differently about how it organized and presented information. Internal staff had to learn the new structure. Case handlers had to think about how their work appeared to the public.

This created second-order effects: procedures were clarified because they had to be explained to the public. Inconsistencies between departments were exposed when cases were reclassified. The organization itself became more coherent because its information had to be coherent.

Lessons About Redesigning Government Institutions

1. Information architecture is the primary UX challenge in government sites.

Visual design improvements matter, but they're secondary. The real problem is that government information is organized by institutional structure, not user needs. Fixing this requires rethinking the fundamental hierarchy of information.

For the KPK, the solution wasn't making buttons prettier. It was recognizing that "trial schedules" and "reporting procedures" were more important to users than "divisions" and "departments." Once the architecture was right, the design fell into place.

1. User research reveals gaps between institutional assumptions and reality.

The KPK assumed that regular visitors would navigate the site like internal staff. Interviews with actual users revealed that assumption was wrong. Journalists needed different information than lawyers. Citizens needed different workflows than NGOs.

Without research, a redesign risks repeating the same mistakes in a new package. Research doesn't just improve the design—it humbles the institution about what it actually knows about its users.

1. Transparency is a design problem, not just a policy problem.

The KPK had policies about information access and transparency. But the website implementation contradicted those policies by making information hard to find. Redesigning the website was as important as any policy reform for actualizing transparency.

This applies broadly to government: transparency isn't achieved just by declaring open data or publishing documents. It's achieved when critical information is organized, discoverable, and presented clearly. Design makes policy real.

Strategic Insights for the C-Suite

1. Information architecture precedes visual design in digital transformation.

Redesigning a complex institution's website often starts with a focus on "making it modern" or "improving the look." But the fundamental problem is usually structural: information is organized by how the institution works, not by how users need it.

Before touching design, audit your information structure. Where would users naturally look for information? Is that where you've actually organized it? Fixing architecture first makes visual design more effective and user research less painful.

1. User research with diverse audiences reveals critical gaps.

Government institutions serve many constituencies: citizens, professionals, journalists, researchers, partners. Each group has different needs and different language for describing what they're looking for. A single design can't serve all of them equally unless you understand their different workflows.

Invest in observing how different user groups actually use your systems. Watch where they get stuck. Listen to what they search for and what language they use. That data is more valuable than any design trend or best practice.

1. Transparency requires friction reduction, not just publication.

Publishing information doesn't create transparency. Transparency is transparency when users can actually find and understand the information. An agency that publishes data in obscure locations and jargon-filled documents hasn't become transparent—it's just moved information to a different hiding place.

Redesigning for transparency means radically simplifying navigation, using plain language, and organizing information around user needs. It's harder than publishing a data portal. But it's the only way transparency becomes real.

1. Website redesign can expose and correct institutional inconsistencies.

When you reclassify information to fit a user-centric structure, you often discover contradictions: case information is described differently in different divisions, procedures are inconsistent, terminology varies. These aren't website problems—they're institutional problems.

A well-designed redesign creates pressure to fix these inconsistencies because they become visible and measurable. The website becomes a mirror reflecting institutional coherence (or incoherence).

1. Mobile-first design isn't a feature—it's acknowledgment of reality.

In 2021, expecting citizens to access government information on desktop was an assumption about the privileged. Many Indonesians access information primarily on mobile phones. Designing for desktop first and mobile second guaranteed that the least privileged users would have the worst experience.

Designing for mobile first assumes that your least-resourced users deserve the best experience. It's an equity principle disguised as a design approach. Build for the constraint (small screens, slow networks) and the unconstrained version becomes elegant naturally.