Adies Kadir's Appointment as Constitutional Judge Challenged in Administrative Court

A number of law lecturers and students have filed a lawsuit at the Jakarta Administrative Court (PTUN) regarding the appointment of Adies Kadir as a Constitutional Court Judge.

Following an online submission via e-court on 18 June 2026, the case, registered under Number: 214/G/2026/PTUN.JKT, underwent its first hearing for a preparatory examination on Tuesday, 30 June 2026.

The lawsuit was filed by 27 parties, 19 of whom are professors and lecturers of constitutional and administrative law belonging to the Constitutional and Administrative Law Society (CALS). The remaining 8 parties consist of several law student communities from various Indonesian universities, including the Moot Court Community (MCC) of UIN Syarif Hidayatullah Jakarta, the Constitutional Law Student Association of UIN Syarif Huddin Jakarta, the Faculty of Law Student Executive Board (BEM) of the University of Indonesia, and the Law School Debate Community (LSDC) of Universitas Muhammadiyah Yogyakarta.

Other participating groups include the Legal Writing Community (KPH) of Universitas Muhammadiyah Yogyakarta, the Moot Court Community (KPS) Petita of Universitas Muhammadiyah Yogyakarta, the Constitutional Observer Community (KPK) of UIN Sunan Kalijaga Yogyakarta, and the Speech and Law Debate Society (SPECIALITY) of Universitas Gadjah Mada.

“The lawsuit, directed at the House of Representatives (DPR) and the President, is a follow-up to the ethical complaints submitted to the Constitutional Court Ethics Council (MKMK),” said Herdiansyah Hamzah, a lecturer at the Faculty of Law, Mulawarman University and one of the plaintiffs, in a statement to Tempo on Tuesday, 30 June 2026.

Bivitri Susanti, one of the plaintiffs representing CALS, stated that while the MKMK acknowledged the controversy surrounding the brief and non-transparent selection process of Adies Kadir, the ethics council ruled that it lacked the authority to adjudicate the matter. Consequently, the lawsuit has been brought to the PTUN, which the plaintiffs believe is the appropriate forum to examine and decide on government administrative actions.

“We are proceeding with the lawsuit in the PTUN, and this is the realisation of that plan. We cannot allow nominating institutions, such as the DPR, to choose constitutional judges at their own discretion,” said Bivitri.

According to Bivitri, this matter concerns the constitutional rights of citizens and the moral responsibility of constitutional and administrative law educators in Indonesia.

Bivitri explained that the lawsuit targets two objects: first, the factual action regarding the process of nominating Adies Kadir as a Constitutional Court Judge by the DPR; and second, Presidential Decree Number 9/P of 2026 concerning the Dismissal and Appointment of Constitutional Court Judges, which was issued based on the DPR’s proposal.

Bivitri stated that both objects are considered to have serious legal flaws, particularly regarding procedural and substantive aspects that violate statutory regulations and the General Principles of Good Governance (AUPB). “These two elements are interconnected,” she noted.

Bivitting added that the lawsuit was filed because the selection process for Adies Kadir was clearly non-transparent, non-participatory, non-objective, and non-accountable, despite such requirements being mandated under Articles 19 and 20(2) of the Constitutional Court Law.

“The absence of an open selection process that is accountable to the public is a crucial point that determines the constitutional legitimacy of the appointment of constitutional judges,” said the lecturer from the Jentera Law School.

In alignment with Bivitri, another CALS representative acting as legal counsel is Denny Indrayana. Denny emphasised that this effort is a further advocacy step to maintain the honour of the Constitutional Court’s judiciary following the MKMK’s ethical decision.

Denny stated that the plaintiffs do not want Constitutional Court Judges chosen through irregular channels that violate the principles of transparency and accountability, especially for a position as vital as one of the nine judges tasked with guarding and interpreting the 1945 Constitution. “Only a true statesman can fill such a position,” Denny remarked.

Denny added that a Constitutional Court Judge must not only be academically proficient but also someone whose morals and ethics are beyond reproach and free from conflicts of interest, as this will directly impact future court rulings. The former Deputy Minister of Law and Human Rights (2011-2014) noted the significance of this for the court’s future decisions.

The MKMK previously read its decision on case Number 03/MKMK/L/ARLTP/02/2026 regarding allegations of ethical violations by the newly inaugurated Judge Adies Kadir on 5 March 2026. In its ruling, the MKMK declined to examine the merits of the case, stating it lacked the authority to adjudicate the report.

The MKMK maintained it had no authority to judge allegations of potential ethical violations by Adies Kadir due to his links to the Golkar Party and his former role as Deputy Speaker of the DPR.

MKMK member Ridwan Mansyur stated that the council’s duty is to examine and evaluate the truth of the facts presented by the complainant to determine if the alleged violation is proven. However, Mansyur noted that the allegations presented by the complainant did not categorise as the conduct of a constitutional judge, but rather as mere assumptions or prejudices based on the complainant’s concerns.

“Even if there are factual elements, those facts occurred when the reported Judge did not yet hold the status of a constitutional judge,” stated Ridwan Mansyur while reading the legal and ethical considerations of the MKMK Decision.