Category Archives: Indonesian Laws

The 8 Points Removed from the Judicial Code of Conduct

A few days ago I noted that the Supreme Court had determined to remove 8 points from the Ethics Code for judges — see here.  I dug up the codes today.  Those from section eight relate to discipline, whereas those from section ten relate to professionalism.  These are two substantive sections of the Code.  Here’s a translation of the (former) articles, some parts of which were very difficult to render in English:

8. Discipline

Discipline requires that upholding norms or rules is believed to be part of a higher calling to carry out the mandate and trust of justice seekers. Discipline will encourage the formation of a dutiful approach to one’s responsibilities, sincerity in devotion and setting an example, and respect for the mandate entrusted to them.

Application:

8.1. Judges are obliged to know and perform tasks in accordance with laws and regulations, particularly the laws of procedure, in order to apply the law correctly and fulfill a sense of justice to every seeker of justice.

8.2. Judges must respect the rights of the parties in the judicial process and seek the examination of the case in a simple, rapid and low cost way.

8.3. Judges must assist the parties and try to overcome all obstacles and hurdles to realize justice that is simple, fast and low cost in accordance with the laws and regulations.

8.4. The chairing judge or a judge appointed as such, shall allocate cases to the panel of judges in a fair and equitable manner, and avoid allocation of cases to judge who have a conflict of interest.

10. Professionalism

Professionalism is underpinned by a moral stance that is determined to carry one’s chosen work with earnestness, backed by the expertise as the basis of knowledge, skill and insight. A professional attitude encourages the formation of personal rectitude and to strive to improve one’s knowledge and performance in order to reach the highest quality of work, effectiveness and efficiency.

Application:

10.1. Judges must take steps to maintain and improve their knowledge, skills and personal qualities so as to perform judicial duties properly.

10.2. Judges must diligently carry out their administrative responsibilities in collaboration with judges and other court officials in running the administration of justice.

10.3. Judges shall give priority to judicial duties over other activities professionally.

10.4. Judges must avoid mistakes in their decisions and not ignore the facts that could condemn the accused or parties, or deliberately make favorable consideration of the accused or parties in cases under adjudication.

8. BERDISIPLIN TINGGI

Disiplin bermakna ketaatan pada norma-norma atau kaidah-kaidah yang diyakini sebagai panggilan luhur untuk mengemban amanah serta kepercayaan masyarakat pencari keadilan. Disiplin tinggi akan mendorong terbentuknya pribadi yang tertib di dalam melaksanakan tugas, ikhlas dalam pengabdian dan berusaha untuk menjadi teladan dalam lingkungannya, serta tidak menyalahgunakan amanah yang dipercayakan kepadanya.

Penerapan :

8.1.Hakim berkewajiban mengetahui dan mendalami serta melaksanakan tugas pokok sesuai dengan peraturan perundang-undangan yang berlaku, khususnya hukum acara, agar dapat menerapkan hukum secara benar dan dapat memenuhi rasa keadilan bagi setiap pencari keadilan.

8.2. Hakim harus menghormati hak-hak para pihak dalam proses peradilan dan berusaha mewujudkan pemeriksaan perkara secara sederhana, cepat dan biaya ringan.

8.3. Hakim harus membantu para pihak dan berusaha mengatasi segala hambatan dan rintangan untuk mewujudkan peradilan yang sederhana, cepat dan biaya ringan sesuai dengan peraturan perundang-undangan yang berlaku.

8.4.Ketua Pengadilan atau Hakim yang ditunjuk, harus mendistribusikan perkara kepada Majelis Hakim secara adil dan merata, serta menghindari pendistribusian perkara kepada Hakim yang memiliki konflik kepentingan.

10. BERSIKAP PROFESIONAL

Profesional bermakna suatu sikap moral yang dilandasi oleh tekad untuk melaksanakan pekerjaan yang dipilihnya dengan kesungguhan, yang didukung oleh keahlian atas dasar pengetahuan, keterampilan dan wawasan luas. Sikap profesional akan mendorong terbentuknya pribadi yang senantiasa menjaga dan mempertahankan mutu pekerjaan, serta berusaha untuk meningkatkan pengetahuan dan kinerja, sehingga tercapai setinggi-tingginya mutu hasil pekerjaan, efektif dan efisien.

Penerapan :

10.1. Hakim harus mengambil langkah-langkah untuk memelihara dan meningkatkan pengetahuan, keterampilan dan kualitas pribadi untuk dapat melaksanakan tugas-tugas peradilan secara baik.

10.2. Hakim harus secara tekun melaksanakan tanggung jawab administratif dan bekerja sama dengan para Hakim dan pejabat pengadilan lain dalam menjalankan administrasi peradilan.

10.3. Hakim wajib mengutamakan tugas yudisialnya di atas kegiatan yang lain secara professional.

10.4. Hakim wajib menghindari terjadinya kekeliruan dalam membuat keputusan, atau mengabaikan fakta yang dapat menjerat terdakwa atau para pihak atau dengan sengaja membuat pertimbangan yamg menguntungkan terdakwa atau para pihak dalam mengadili suatu perkara yang ditanganinya.

Download the Code of Conduct here: Kode Etik Hakim

Advertisements
Tagged , ,

The Judicial Commission’s Authority to Monitor Judges and Recommend Sanctions

Just now I blogged on a news articles on KP2KKN reporting two judges from the Semarang Corruption Court to the Judicial Commission (and the Supreme Court) — link here.  I thought I’d follow-up with a brief summary of the authority of Judicial Commission to receive complaints from the community and to recommend sanctions to the Supreme Court as stimpulated in Law No. 22 of 2004 on the Judicial Commision.

The two main authorities of the Judicial Commission–to shortlist Supreme Court Judges and to monitor judges–are established in Article 13:

Article 13

The Judicial Commission has the authority to:

a) propose the appointment of Supreme Judges to the DPR; and

b) uphold the honor and dignity of judges and control their attitudes.

Pasal 13

Komisi Yudisial mempunyai wewenang:

a. mengusulkan pengangkatan Hakim Agung kepada DPR; dan

b. menegakkan kehormatan dan keluhuran martabat serta menjaga perilaku hakim.

Articles 20-22 provide more details on implementation of Article 13 b):

Article 20

In executing the authority as meant in Article 13 letter b the Judicial Commission shall be tasked to control the attitudes of judge in an effort to uphold their honor and dignity and improve their attitudes.

Article 21

In executing the authority as meant in Article 13 letter b the Judicial Commission shall be tasked to propose the imposition of sanction on judges to the leadership of the Supreme Court and/or the Constitutional Court.

Article 22

In conducting the control as meant in Article 20, the Judicial Commission shall:

a) receive tip-offs from the public about the attitudes of judges;

b) ask for periodic reports from court bodies about the attitudes of judges;

c) examine alleged violations of codes of ethic by judges;

d) summon and ask for information from judges who have allegedly violated codes of ethic; and

e) make reports on the result of examination in the form of recommendations to the Supreme Court and/or Constitutional Court, with copies addressed to the President and the DPR.

Pasal 20

Dalam melaksanakan wewenang sebagaimana dimaksud dalam Pasal 13 huruf b Komisi Yudisial mempunyai tugas melakukan pengawasan terhadap perilaku hakim dalam rangka menegakkan kehormatan dan keluhuran martabat serta menjaga perilaku hakim.

Pasal 21

Untuk kepentingan pelaksanaan kewenangan sebagaimana dimaksud dalam Pasal 13 huruf b, Komisi Yudisial bertugas mengajukan usul penjatuhan sanksi terhadap hakim kepada pimpinan Mahkamah Agung dan/atau Mahkamah Konstitusi. (1)

Pasal 22

Dalam melaksanakan pengawasan sebagaimana dimaksud dalam Pasal 20, Komisi Yudisial:

a. menerima laporan masyarakat tentang perilaku hakim; meminta laporan secara berkala kepada badan peradilan berkaitan dengan perilaku hakim;

b. melakukan pemeriksaan terhadap dugaan pelanggaran perilaku hakim;

c. memanggil dan meminta keterangan dari hakim yang diduga melanggar kode etik perilaku hakim; dan

d. membuat laporan hasil pemeriksaan yang berupa rekomendasi dan disampaikan kepada Mahkamah Agung dan/atau Mahkamah Konstitusi, serta tindasannya disampaikan kepada Presiden dan DPR.

It’s a relatively weak institution as it only has the authority to recommend sanctions  Nonetheless, it’s a mechanism that can be used to generate some public pressure on judges and the Supreme Court.

I’ve uploaded Law No. 22 of 2004 in Indonesian and English below:

UU22-2004 Komisi Yudisial

UU22-2004 Judicial Commission

The Judicial Commission’s website is here.

Tagged

Political approvals required to investigate regional politicians (Law No. 32 of 2004)

Law No. 32 of 2004 on Regional Government requires written approval from President or the Minister of Home Affairs before the police or state prosecutors can initiate an investigation against a regional head or local representative council member. This requirement often causes causes long delays for some corruption cases, sometimes over a year.  The reasons given for the delays come in various permutations:

  • Local investigators claim they have sent the request, but they’re unsure whether it’s been sent from the Attorney General’s office in Jakarta to the President
  • Investigators claim it has been sent to the President, but that it has been lost at the State Secretariat
  • Investigators claim it has been sent to the President, but that they’ve not received confirmation of receipt and therefore can’t begin to count the 60 days
  • Investigators claim that it has been signed by the President, but the letter has been lost at the State Secretariat, Home Affairs or the central Attorney General’s office.

It seems that this requirement provides a convenient way for all parties to pass the buck and justify inaction; a classic strategy of delaying an investigation.  There’s also the doctrinal question of whether this violates the principal of equality before the law.  Below I’ve translated the two articles from the relevant legislation.

For regional heads and deputy heads, i.e. governors and mayors:

Article 36

(1) Initiation of an pre-investigaton (penyelidikan) and investigation (penyidikan) into a regional head and/or deputy regional head will be taken after written approval of the President upon the request of investigators.

(2) In the situation where written approval as referred to in paragraph (1) is not provided by the President in within 60 (sixty) days from the receipt of the request, the process of pre-investigation and investigation may continue.

Pasal 36

(1) Tindakan penyelidikan dan penyidikan terhadap kepala daerah dan/atau wakil kepala daerah dilaksanakan setelah adanya persetujuan tertulis dari Presiden atas permintaan penyidik.

(2) Dalam hal persetujuan tertulis sebagaimana dimaksud pada ayat (1) tidak diberikan oleh Presiden dalam waktu paling lambat 60 (enam puluh) hari terhitung sejak diterimanya permohonan, proses penyelidikan dan penyidikan dapat dilakukan.

For members of provincial and district representative councils:

Article 53

(1)  Initiation of an investigation (penyidikan) into a regional council representative requires the written approval from the Minister of the Interior on behalf of the President for provincial council representatives and from the Governor on behalf of the Minister of Home Affairs for district or city council members.

(2) In the situation where written approval as referred to in paragraph (1) is not provided within 60 (sixty) days from the receipt of the request, the process of investigation may continue.

Pasal 53

(1) Tindakan penyidikan terhadap anggota DPRD dilaksanakan setelah adanya persetujuan tertulis dari Menteri Dalam Negeri atas nama Presiden bagi anggota DPRD provinsi dari Gubernur atas nama Menteri Dalam Negeri bagi anggota DPRD kabupaten/kota.

(2) Dalam hal persetujuan tertulis sebagaimana dimaksud pada ayat (1) tidak diberikan dalam waktu paling lambat 60 (enam puluh) hari semenjak diterimanya permohonan, proses penyidikan dapat dilakukan.

I’ve uploaded the entire law here for those interested: UU 32 2004 Pemerintahan Daerah.

Tagged ,