Adies Kadir Undergoes Closed Preliminary Hearing Before Constitutional Court Ethics Council

The Constitutional Court Ethics Council (MKMK) has heard testimony from the reported Constitutional Court Justice Adies Kadir during a preliminary hearing held on Thursday, 19 February 2026. MKMK Chairman I Dewa Gede Palguna stated that preliminary hearings had commenced on 12 February 2026 with testimony from the complainants. The council then proceeded to hear testimony from the respondent in a closed session.

“It was conducted today behind closed doors, in accordance with Constitutional Court regulations, from 8 to 9 am Western Indonesian Time,” Palguna told Tempo on Thursday, 19 February 2026.

Following Adies’s testimony, the three MKMK members will convene a closed judicial deliberation meeting (RPH). The RPH will determine whether the case against Adies Kadir merits proceeding to a full hearing or should be terminated.

Palguna indicated that should the case proceed, hearings would be held behind closed doors. He noted that open sessions would only be held for the reading of the verdict.

During a hearing with Commission III of the House of Representatives (DPR), the MKMK Chairman affirmed that no party may intervene in the council’s authority to handle the ethics complaint against Adies Kadir.

“This is not merely my personal stance, but the position of the Constitutional Court Ethics Council — that with respect to our authority, no institution whatsoever may intervene, including the constitutional court justices who appointed us,” Palguna stated at the Parliamentary Complex in Senayan, Jakarta, on 18 February 2026, as quoted from Parliamentary TV.

Palguna declared that the MKMK cannot disclose the substance of complaints or findings currently under examination, including the Adies Kadir report. He explained that doing so would violate the council’s oath and procedural rules.

The MKMK also rejected a request from Commission III members to halt the complaint or findings before the preliminary hearing stage. According to Palguna, such action would itself contravene MKMK procedural rules. “We also cannot dismiss this from the outset, as honourable members have suggested, because our procedural rules stipulate otherwise,” Palguna stressed.

Palguna’s refusal was in response to a request from Commission III member Soedeson Tandra for the MKMK to discontinue the ethics proceedings against Adies. The Golkar politician questioned the MKMK’s decision to accept and process the complaint against Adies Kadir, arguing that Adies had been reported before being inaugurated as a constitutional court justice.

Soedeson claimed the complaint did not satisfy formal procedural requirements and should therefore be rejected. “The first issue is that this case must be rejected — declared inadmissible. That is what we wish to have explained to us,” Soedeson said during the hearing with the MKMK.

Additionally, Soedeson questioned the MKMK’s jurisdiction in examining the ethics of a constitutional court justice who had not yet been inaugurated at the time of the complaint. He argued that the MKMK should only examine violations by serving justices, not act on a post factum basis.

Adies Kadir is a Constitutional Court justice nominated by the DPR who was reported to the MKMK one day after his inauguration on 5 February 2026. The DPR had proposed Adies Kadir to replace Constitutional Court Justice Arief Hidayat, who completed his term on 3 February 2026. However, Adies’s candidacy process drew criticism because the DPR abruptly put forward his name in late January, despite having previously confirmed Inosentius Samsul as its nominee for the Constitutional Court in mid-2025.

In response to the complaint, Commission III of the DPR, which oversees legal affairs, summoned the MKMK to explain the ethics report.