Indonesia faces justice challenges<\/p>\n
Supreme Court Justice Adi Andojo who grabbed headlines last
\nyear for blowing the whistle on collusion at the highest law
\ninstitution will retire on May 1, 1997. Charles Himawan, a
\nprofessor of law and economics at the University of Indonesia and
\nmember of the National Commission on Human Rights took this
\nopportunity to reflect on the target the justice was fighting
\nthen.<\/p>\n
JAKARTA (JP): The question in regard to Justice Adi Andojo's
\nretirement next week is, will his idealism also retire? Will his
\nstruggle to eradicate the alleged corruption within the judiciary
\nsystem also fade away?<\/p>\n
The answer should be negative, because a positive answer would
\nonly make Indonesia less competitive in the free market of the
\nnext century, a link many development practitioners overlook.<\/p>\n
We recall last year that former chief justice Soerjono wrote
\nto President Soeharto recommending that Justice Adi be dismissed
\namidst an allegation that there was collusion, an euphemism for
\ncorruption, within the judiciary system. It seems that President
\nSoeharto wisely postponed the request, since retirement age has
\nnearly caught up with Adi.<\/p>\n
Few judges, however, match Adi's ability to look into the
\nmatter further, more than just a mere issue of collusion within
\nthe judiciary. Many judges have failed to see the close
\nrelationship between the issue of corruption and that of economic
\ndevelopment -- that corruption greatly slows down a nation's
\ndevelopment. Corruption may be difficult to prove through
\nevidence, but it is clearly reflected in the nation's economic
\ndevelopment.<\/p>\n
If balance of payments and export performance could be used as
\na yardstick to gauge the pace of the nation's development, then
\nIndonesia would be facing a serious problem. Minister of Industry
\nand Trade Tunky Ariwibowo recently warned of a continuing deficit
\nin the balance of payments as the following table indicates
\n(Kompas, Feb. 22, 1997).<\/p>\n
Table A: Indonesia's Balance of Payments (US$ billion)<\/p>\n
1994\/95 1995\/96 1996\/97 (estimated)
\n -3.5 -6.9 -8.8<\/p>\n
The minister further stated that to offset the deficit, export
\nperformance must be improved. In response to his appeal,
\nbureaucrats tried to improve the performance of exports in
\nvarious fields. They have simplified the procedure by using
\ncredit and speeding up custom requirements, but they failed to
\nlook at export performance in the field of law, specifically in
\nthe judiciary. Indonesia's export performance has been a concern
\nof many development practitioners, particularly if it is compared
\nto the export performance of Indonesia's nearest neighbors,
\nSingapore and Malaysia, as the following table shows.<\/p>\n
Table B: Exports (US$ billion) according to Asiaweek<\/p>\n
1980 1990 1994 1995 1996
\n Indonesia 21.9 25.5 37.0 40.1 47.5
\n Malaysia 12.9 29.4 48.4 65.2 76.4
\n Singapore 19.3 52.4 88.8 102 124<\/p>\n
The above figures clearly reflect a missing link in the export
\nperformance of Indonesia in the past decade. In 1980, Indonesia's
\nexports were greater than Malaysia and Singapore's, but since
\n1990, particularly in the last three years, their exports have
\ngreatly surpassed Indonesia's.<\/p>\n
Presuming that these three great nations have the same work
\nethic and development initiative, then Adi's allegation of
\ncorruption within the judiciary will shed light on the poor
\nperformance of Indonesia's exports, inconsequently because the
\njudiciaries of Malaysia and Singapore are among the most
\nrespected courts of law in the world. Malaysia and Singapore are
\nnations that rectify, with fairness and justice, any wrong
\ncommitted. International buyers feel comfortable in purchasing
\ngoods from Malaysia and Singapore, because they are assured of a
\njudiciary system that will uphold their rights in the event that
\ntheir rights are violated.<\/p>\n
This is clearly the missing link between a nation's drive and
\nthe reliability of its judiciary. It should be noted that there
\nare many problems that should be resolved before a reliable
\njudiciary can be achieved, i.e. adjusting the quality of life of
\njudges. Whatever the problems are, they should be addressed and
\nbe dealt with. They cannot be left hanging and unresolved at the
\nexpense of the nation's economic development.<\/p>\n
President Soeharto recently, in conjunction with the launching
\nof a book titled The Birth of a Nation and State, warned the
\nnation to implement continuing development with a sense of
\njustice and continuous correction where such correction is needed
\n(Kompas, April 8, 1997).<\/p>\n
One correction that is urgently needed is in the judiciary
\nsystem. Ignoring this warning, many bureaucrats instead feel
\ncomfortable about their achievements. The English say that their
\nattitude is "gold-achieving" rather than "gold-seeking".
\nComparing today's Indonesia with the Indonesia of 1945, some
\nbureaucrats are proud and complacent about what has been
\naccomplished. Great historians say we learn from history not to
\njustify our present shortcomings, but to prepare for the future.
\nThis can only be done if judges and other law practitioners,
\nparticularly litigation lawyers, can keep feeding the fire that
\nAdi sparked. Justice Adi Andojo may retire, but justice can never
\nretire.<\/p>",
"url": "https:\/\/jawawa.id\/newsitem\/indonesia-faces-justice-challenges-1447893297",
"image": ""
},
"sponsor": "Okusi Associates",
"sponsor_url": "https:\/\/okusiassociates.com"
}