'Judiciary independence never compromised'<\/p>\n
JAKARTA (JP): Chief Justice Sarwata denied over the weekend
\ncharges that the judiciary had given its independence to the
\nbureaucracy.<\/p>\n
At a rare press conference after the breaking of the fast at
\nhis office, Sarwata said that even President Soeharto had
\npromised not to interfere in the judiciary.<\/p>\n
"The president gave his personal guarantee to me last
\nNovember," said Sarwata, who was appointed chief justice by
\npresidential decree in November.<\/p>\n
Critics have questioned the judiciary's independence because
\nthe courts had almost always decided in favor of the government
\nand the powerful.<\/p>\n
Sarwata rejected the idea of centralizing the judiciary's
\nmanagement under the Supreme Court instead of sharing it with the
\nAttorney General's Office.<\/p>\n
He argued that Indonesia did not strictly adhere to the
\nprinciples of Trias Politica (the separation of powers into three
\nbranches: legislative, judicial and executive bodies).<\/p>\n
Observers hope that clear separation of powers will improve
\nthe judiciary and legislature.<\/p>\n
Sarwata said, "All three bodies work toward a common goal,
\nhand in hand. For instance, a Court doesn't have its own state-
\nowned company, therefore it is financially dependent on the
\nexecutive which proposes the judiciary's budget to the
\nlegislature.<\/p>\n
"However, never to date and never in the future will the other
\nbranches of power intervene in the judiciary's independence," he
\nsaid.<\/p>\n
Many legal experts and practitioners, the latest being the
\nIndonesian Jurists Association, have suggested that the judiciary
\nbe managed by the Supreme Court alone instead of in conjunction
\nwith the Ministry of Justice.<\/p>\n
Experts believe the judiciary will be more likely to be
\nindependent under "one-roof" management.<\/p>\n
The Ministry of Justice administers the judiciary, including
\nthe salaries and appointment of judges, whereas the Supreme Court
\nmanages judicial technicalities. Experts said this made the
\ncourts bias toward the government.<\/p>\n
Frequently cited cases of bias include the Supreme Court's
\ndecisions on land appropriation for the construction of
\nKedungombo Dam in Central Java and the imprisonment of labor
\nleader Muchtar Pakpahan.<\/p>\n
On Kedungombo Dam, then chief justice Purwoto S. Gandasubrata
\noverturned in 1994 an earlier ruling by justice Asikin Kusumah
\nAtmadja that favored 34 Central Java residents affected by the
\ndam's construction.<\/p>\n
Asikin ruled in 1993 that the government had violated the law
\nby starting construction of the dam in January 1989 before the
\nresidents had agreed to compensation.<\/p>\n
Late last year, then chief justice Soerjono overturned a
\ndecision by Justice Adi Andojo Soetjipto that exonerated Pakpahan
\nof charges of inciting labor unrest.<\/p>\n
Sarwata said the Supreme Court was determined to process its
\nbacklog of 16,599 cases. The Court aimed to process 10,000 cases
\na year so that by the year 2000 it would only have a "normal"
\nbacklog of cases. (08)<\/p>",
"url": "https:\/\/jawawa.id\/newsitem\/judiciary-independence-never-compromised-1447893297",
"image": ""
},
"sponsor": "Okusi Associates",
"sponsor_url": "https:\/\/okusiassociates.com"
}