Chaotic judiciary
Chaotic judiciary
The first month of the year has seen at least two chaotic
applications of law and justice in the country, which means our
judiciary will remain the same as before: unreformed and corrupt.
The first instance was when the Jakarta Prosecutor's Office
named Sjahril Sabirin (former Bank Indonesia governor) and I Putu
Gede Ary Suta (former Indonesian Bank Restructuring Agency head)
suspects on Jan. 12, National Police chief Gen. Da'i Bachtiar
made a conflicting statement, saying the police had yet to
determine them as suspects.
The second instance was in the East Jakarta District Court's
release on Jan. 15 of two suspects in the Bank Rakyat Indonesia
(BRI) scam -- but they were immediately detained again by the
Jakarta Prosecutor's Office.
These pictures of our judicial process reflects conflicting
interests among the nation's law enforcers, e.g., the police,
prosecutors and judges. People see through them -- as is already
the case -- how chaotic and unruly our judiciary system is.
Denny Kalimang of the Indonesian Advocates Association
lamented that such confusing and contradictory information
indicated a tendency for a power struggle between prosecutors and
the police, especially since the establishment of the Corruption
Eradication Commission (KPK). Each wants to show the public that
they are the most capable in handling corruption cases.
This would not have happened, says Kalimang, if the police had
handled corruption cases and prosecutors had prosecuted the
corrupters while supervising police performance.
The latest instance concerns the Account No. 502 corruption
case involving the above-mentioned ex-state officials and whether
the case was purely a legal matter, or was merely for political
gains by certain parties as regards the general elections.
These pictures of our justice system illustrates the stagnancy
of legal reform, much as the Supreme Court chief acknowledged
that judiciary corruption is rampant (The Jakarta Post, Jan. 15).
This country seems to be waiting for a real champion of reform
who might emerge from the direct presidential election later this
year. If the election does not produce such a champion, we cannot
expect legal reform, so let us pray to God instead that this
country does not fall into disgrace.
M. RUSDI
Jakarta