Fair and just trials still far away: Experts<\/p>\n
The Jakarta Post, Jakarta<\/p>\n
While the revisions of the laws on judicial powers and the
\nSupreme Court generally prevent government intervention, fair and
\njust trials are still a long way off, experts say.<\/p>\n
Rizqi S. Assegaff from the Institute for Research and Advocacy
\nfor Independent Courts (LeIP) and Harkristuti Harkrisnowo of the
\nUniversity of Indonesia said on Friday that a lack of supervisory
\nregulations and overlapping of laws could still adversely
\ninfluence court trials.<\/p>\n
\"The revisions were made in a hurry and lacked the people's
\nparticipation in the deliberations. We found many weaknesses that
\ncould end up becoming negative issues for the Supreme Court and
\nthe judiciary system,\" Rizqi said.<\/p>\n
He was asked to comment on the House of Representatives (DPR)
\ndecision on Thursday to endorse the revisions.<\/p>\n
Rizqi revealed that the revised laws gave too much power to
\nthe Supreme Court justices, as the laws could be used to pressure
\njudges during certain trials, without mentioning an independent
\ncommission which could monitor chief justices.<\/p>\n
He suggested that the laws should have explicitly stated that
\nthe Supreme Court could not dismiss or remove a judge without
\nfirst getting confirmation from a judicial commission.<\/p>\n
\"I have heard that certain chief justices have planned to
\ntransfer certain judges to remote areas after the revision of the
\nlaws,\" Rizqi said.<\/p>\n
He said the laws also threatened the independence of trials
\nand stipulated that the Supreme Court would be in charge of
\nsupervising lawyers, although the law on advocacy, which was
\napproved earlier this year, states that a legal counselor must be
\nindependent.<\/p>\n
He also said that the Supreme Court could claim that their law
\nwas legally stronger since it was the most recent, although both
\nare considered special laws (lex specialis).<\/p>\n
The House endorsed on Thursday the revisions on Laws No.
\n14\/1070 on Judicial Power and No. 14\/1985 on the Supreme Court,
\ntaking away the power of the Ministry of Justice and Human Rights
\nto intervene in the country's court system.<\/p>\n
Under the old laws, the ministry was in charge of promotions,
\nplacement, salaries and administrative affairs of the judges,
\nwhile the Supreme Court handled only appeals.<\/p>\n
During the authoritarian president Soeharto's regime, judges
\noften favored defendants, mostly in political cases and a
\nrejection of government intervention, could lead to dismissal or
\ntransfer to an outer island court.<\/p>\n
With the revision of the laws, all administrative affairs and
\nassets of the court are now in the hands of the Supreme Court.<\/p>\n
Harkristuti supported Rizqi's opinion that the laws did not
\nclearly mention supervisory bodies -- external or internal --
\nthat could check the power of the court.<\/p>\n
\"I also do not see any political will from the current
\ngovernment to establish an independent and just system. It will
\nstill take time to develop it,\" she said.<\/p>\n
She said that some requirements for an independent judicial
\nsystem, such as financial support from the government and
\npreparation of judges, was still missing.<\/p>\n
However, Harkristuti welcomed the revisions of the laws as a
\ngood start which should be followed by other laws, including the
\nestablishment of a judicial commission.<\/p>\n
\"I know that the Supreme Court has prepared a blueprint to
\nimprove the performance of the judiciary in the future. It's not
\nbad,\" she said.<\/p>",
"url": "https:\/\/jawawa.id\/newsitem\/fair-and-just-trials-still-far-away-experts-1447893297",
"image": ""
},
"sponsor": "Okusi Associates",
"sponsor_url": "https:\/\/okusiassociates.com"
}