{
    "success": true,
    "data": {
        "id": 1861160,
        "msgid": "expert-mpr-visit-to-mk-and-ma-could-intervene-in-judicial-independence-1784109093",
        "date": "2026-07-15 16:06:00",
        "title": "Expert: MPR Visit to MK and MA Could Intervene in Judicial Independence",
        "author": "Cahya  Mulyana",
        "source": "MEDIA_INDONESIA",
        "tags": "",
        "topic": "Legal",
        "summary": "Constitutional law expert Bivitri Susanti has warned that a visit by People's Consultative Assembly (MPR) leaders to the Constitutional Court (MK) and Supreme Court (MA) risks creating the impression of intervention in the judiciary. She argued that such meetings, including the signing of a memorandum of understanding, undermine the independence of judicial institutions. Susanti suggested the move may be motivated by a desire to restore the MPR's former status as the highest state institution or to weaken the judiciary.",
        "content": "<p>Constitutional law expert Bivitri Susanti has criticised a visit by\nthe leadership of the People\u2019s Consultative Assembly (MPR) to the\nConstitutional Court (MK) and the Supreme Court (MA). She stated that\nthe meeting could create the impression of intervention in judicial\ninstitutions, which must remain independent and free from influence by\nother state bodies. Bivitri stressed that in the constitutional system,\nthe MA and MK must be protected from any form of interference, whether\nthrough memoranda of understanding or meetings that could affect\ninstitutional independence. \u201cMoreover, the MA and MK are judicial\ninstitutions which, in theory, must not be intervened in at all, bound\nby MoUs, or anything of the sort,\u201d Bivitri told reporters on Tuesday\n(14\/7). She emphasised that judges in both institutions must be given\nspace to decide cases independently without pressure or direction from\nother bodies. \u201cLet them make decisions according to the cases that come\nto them. There should be no intervention, no need for advice in the form\nof courtesy calls from other institutions,\u201d she said. Bivitri assessed\nthat there are two possible reasons behind the MPR leadership\u2019s visit to\nthe MK and MA. The first is a desire to restore the MPR\u2019s image as the\nhighest state institution, as it was before the amendment to the 1945\nConstitution. \u201cThe MPR wants, especially its leadership, to be\nconsidered a separate institution, the highest state institution like\nbefore the amendment,\u201d she said. However, Bivitri noted that after the\nconstitutional amendment, the MPR is no longer the highest state\ninstitution. The MPR only exercises the authority stipulated in Article\n3 of the 1945 Constitution, namely amending and enacting the\nConstitution, inaugurating the president and vice president, and\ndismissing the president and\/or vice president according to\nconstitutional mechanisms. She also reminded that MPR leaders are\nmembers of the House of Representatives (DPR) or the Regional\nRepresentatives Council (DPD) who carry out MPR functions when in\nsession, and therefore do not have special authority to build\ninstitutional relations with the judiciary. The second possibility\nhighlighted by Bivitri is an attempt to weaken the independence of\njudicial power. She said this suspicion is reinforced by the signing of\na memorandum of understanding regarding copies of rulings after the\nMPR\u2019s visit to the MK. \u201cThe second possibility is that there is a desire\nto weaken the judiciary, because the DPR itself is already weak, as we\nknow, seven out of eight factions in the DPR are all part of the KIM\nPlus coalition,\u201d she said. Bivitri also assessed that if a similar move\nwere made directly by the President, the potential for public criticism\nwould be greater. She therefore suspects the MPR is being positioned to\ncarry out this agenda by building an image as the highest state\ninstitution. She stressed that every state institution must carry out\nits functions according to the authority granted by the constitution and\nthat maintaining distance between branches of power is an essential\nrequirement for preserving judicial independence and the rule of\nlaw.<\/p>",
        "url": "https:\/\/jawawa.id\/newsitem\/expert-mpr-visit-to-mk-and-ma-could-intervene-in-judicial-independence-1784109093",
        "image": ""
    },
    "sponsor": "Okusi Associates",
    "sponsor_url": "https:\/\/okusiassociates.com"
}