EDITORIAL BUAT SELASA 6 APRIL 2004<\/p>\n
On judicial reform<\/p>\n
From a certain point of view, the action taken by the Ministry
\nof Justice and Human Rights last week to transfer its powers over
\njudicial administrative and financial affairs to the Supreme
\nCourt is unquestionably a step in the right direction.<\/p>\n
Until the ministry's announcement of the action last week, the
\nadministering of justice in this country was executed by a
\njudicial apparatus that had for decades prevailed under a system
\nthat could only be called peculiar in any democracy.
\nAdministrative matters such as the appointment, promotion and
\nremuneration of judges fell under the jurisdiction of the
\nMinistry of Justice and Human Rights, while the Supreme Court
\ntook responsibility over the actual dispensing of justice.<\/p>\n
Quite naturally, under such a system in which a Cabinet
\nminister was in firm control of the careers and personal welfare
\nof judges, the government could steer the course of justice to
\nfit its own interests, although in theory judges remained free to
\nmake their decisions in accordance with the dictates of their
\nconscience. Which, of course, was precisely why this
\nunconventional system was introduced, in a variety of forms,
\nunder the authoritarian regimes of president Sukarno in the late
\n1950s and president Soeharto in the late 1960s and early 1970s.
\nNot since the early 1950s, during the brief period of Indonesia's
\nexperiment with parliamentary democracy -- the so-called \"era of
\nfree fight liberalism\" -- has the country known anything close to
\na truly independent judiciary.<\/p>\n
Not, of course, that the system guaranteed that this would
\nalways work to the advantage of those in power. A few cases are
\nknown in which judges, including those of the Supreme Court, made
\ndecisions that could only have irked the authorities, but it was
\na judge with strong convictions indeed who could withstand the
\ntemptation of huge material rewards for compliance or the threat
\nof penalties in the form of demotion or dismissal for dissent.<\/p>\n
Clearly, the action taken by the Ministry of Justice and Human
\nRights last week is a step in the right direction, in the sense
\nthat it helps to ensure the judiciary's independence from the
\ngovernment, in accordance with the trias politica principle of
\nthe separation of state powers.<\/p>\n
Unfortunately, however, Indonesians have so far greeted this
\nlatest development in their country's judicial reform efforts
\nwith a good deal of skepticism. Few Indonesians believe that
\ntheir courts will be free from interference by people with either
\nmoney or power, or both, as long as judges continue to pronounce
\njudgments that run counter to the common sense of the people.
\nAlthough bribery, or just plain bias, is often difficult to prove
\nin court, several cases reeking of blatant favoritism in the
\nrecent past have not helped the efforts to restore the public's
\nconfidence in the judiciary.<\/p>\n
Although at present candidates for the Supreme Court must be
\nscreened by the House of Representatives for professionalism and
\na \"clean\" record before they take up their posts, this does not
\nseem to be enough to guarantee that those who make the grade also
\npass the public's scrutiny.<\/p>\n
The case of House of Representatives Speaker Akbar Tandjung,
\nwho was convicted by two lower courts for corruption and yet was
\nacquitted on all charges by the Supreme Court, is a case in
\npoint. In other words, although ceding authority over the
\nhandling of all judicial matters to the Supreme Court is the
\nright action to take, it is not enough to ensure that true
\njustice can be achieved merely by this single step. The public
\ndemands accountability from a Supreme Court and from a legal
\nsystem they can scrutinize.<\/p>\n
It has not helped that this same skepticism over the ongoing
\njudicial reforms is apparently shared by observers abroad. The
\nlowly reputation of the Indonesian judiciary has been cited as
\none of the main reasons that foreign investors are staying away.<\/p>\n
With the legislative elections now behind them, Indonesians
\ncan only hope that this matter of legal reform will get the
\npriority treatment it deserves from the legislature. After all, a
\ntaintless professional judiciary is key to the country's
\nresurgence.<\/p>",
"url": "https:\/\/jawawa.id\/newsitem\/editorial-buat-selasa-6-april-2004-1447893297",
"image": ""
},
"sponsor": "Okusi Associates",
"sponsor_url": "https:\/\/okusiassociates.com"
}