Judicial Commission of Indonesia

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
National emblem of Indonesia Garuda Pancasila.svg
This article is part of a series on the
politics and government of
Indonesia
Pancasila (national philosophy)
Constitution
Foreign relations

The Judicial Commission of Indonesia (Indonesian: Komisi Yudisial) was established as a consequence of the third amendment to the Constitution of Indonesia ratified by the Indonesian People's Consultative Assembly on 9 November 2001 [1]

History[edit]

The idea of a body to consider and give a final ruling on the appointment, promotion, transfer or dismissal of judges first arose in 1968 but failed to make the statute books. Pressure for the establishment of a body to bring about an honest, clean, transparent and professional legal system resurfaced in 1998 after president Soeharto resigned from office. On 9 November 2001, during its annual session, the People's Consultative Assembly passed the third amendment to the Constitution of Indonesia, mandating the establishment of a Judicial Commission. The proposal to establish the Judicial Commission was added into the amendment at the last minute and, in the view of some observers, the Commission was established in a hasty way.[2] On 13 August 2004, Law No. 22 on the Judicial Commission was promulgated and on 2 July 2005, the president officially appointed the seven members of the Commission. The members were sworn in by the president on 2 August 2005.[3][4]

Powers[edit]

The commission proposes candidates for the Indonesian Supreme Court and works to "maintain the honor, dignity and behavior of judges". Members are appointed by the president with the agreement of the Indonesian House of Representatives.[5] The precise authority of the Judicial Commission, however, is not agreed as between the different branches of the legal system in Indonesia.[6] It was reported in mid-2011, for example, that since its establishment in 2005 the Judicial Commission had summoned nine justices to be investigated for alleged ethics violations but that none had answered the summonses. Members of other branches of the legal system, such as Supreme Court judges, were reported to have taken the view that the Judicial Commission was exceeding its powers in attempting to summon judges in certain cases.[7]

The Commission suffered a major blow to its authority when the Constitutional Court in August 2006 granted a request filed by 31 judges of the Supreme Court to drop activities that gave the Commission the power to investigate alleged violations by Supreme Court and Constitutional Court justices. Following that decision of the Constitutional Court, it was agreed that the powers of the Judicial Commission needed to be clarified. Most recently, during 2011, the Indonesian House of Representatives had under consideration a revision to the 2004 Judicial Commission Law which would strengthen the powers of the Judicial Commission to directly punish high court and district court judges. Under the proposed changes to the law, however, the authority to punish Supreme Court justices would remain with the Supreme Court.[8]

References[edit]

  • Denny Indrayana (2008) Indonesian Constitutional Reform 1999-2002: An Evaluation of Constitution-Making in Transition, Kompas Book Publishing, Jakarta ISBN 978-979-709-394-5
  • A. Ahsin Thohari (2004) Judicial Commission and Judicial Reform, Institute for Policy Research and Advocacy, Jakarta ISBN 979-8981-35-9
  • Judicial Commission Website

Notes[edit]

  1. ^ Denny Indrayana (2008), pp. 241, 266
  2. ^ Sebastiaan Pompe, 'The Judge S case why court oversight fails', The Jakarta Post, 13 June 2011.
  3. ^ Denny Indrayana (2008), pp. 241
  4. ^ Judicial Commission Website:Sejarah Pembentukan Komisi Yudisial (History of the Establishment of the Judicial Commission) access date 2009-05-17
  5. ^ Denny Indrayana (2008), p267. For a report on the process of the selection of six new judges to the Supreme Court in 2011, see Ina Parlina, 'KY recommends 18 'quality' justice candidates to House', The Jakarta Post, 2 August 2011.
  6. ^ See the useful discussion in Sebastiaan Pompe, op.cit.
  7. ^ Ina Parlina, 'Judicial Commission finds justices an elusive lot', The Jakarta Post, 16 July 2011.
  8. ^ Bagus BT Saragih and Ina Parlina, 'Debate on sanctions for judges stalls KY law enactment', The Jakarta Post, 21 July 2011.

External links[edit]