<![CDATA[Emergency situations require governments to procure goods and services rapidly, often through simplified procedures that prioritize speed over conventional procurement safeguards. While such flexibility is necessary, emergency procurement can also create opportunities for inflated prices, favoritism, conflicts of interest, and weak documentation. This article examines corruption risks in emergency procurement within Indonesia's disaster management system. Using normative juridical and policy analysis, the study evaluates emergency procurement rules, audit mechanisms, transparency requirements, and institutional responsibilities. The article argues that emergency conditions should not be treated as an automatic justification for reduced accountability. Instead, anti-corruption controls should be adapted to emergency circumstances while preserving essential transparency and traceability. The study proposes a disaster procurement integrity framework incorporating pre-approved supplier databases, emergency price benchmarks, digital documentation, post-disaster audits, beneficial ownership checks, and public disclosure of contracts. Particular attention is given to disaster-prone regions where rapid procurement is repeatedly required. The article concludes that Indonesia can improve emergency response while reducing corruption risks by designing procurement systems specifically for crisis conditions rather than temporarily suspending ordinary accountability principles.]]>
