Chief Justice hails judicial commission

Chief Justice hails judicial commission

Tertiani ZB Simanjuntak, The Jakarta Post, Jakarta

The country's judiciary, especially its judges, has long been
criticized for its dependence on the executive body.

Its lack of independence is mainly because the judges'
recruitment and administration are in the hands of the Ministry
of Justice and Human Rights, with a little supervisory power by
the Supreme Court.

In an attempt to establish an independent judiciary, Supreme
Court Chief Justice Bagir Manan and noted lawyer Frans Hendra
Winarta have said that the establishment of an independent
judicial commission is essential to avoid government intervention
in local courts.

The judicial commission, the establishment of which is
required under the third amendment of the 1945 Constitution, will
be an independent body authorized to name candidates for judges
and justices, with the power to maintain and uphold the judges'
dignity and integrity.

Bagir, in an interview with The Jakarta Post on Thursday,
deplored the sluggish response of legislators to amend the
Constitution.

"Should the government let the judiciary be completely put
under the Supreme Court's roof, then such a commission is needed
to supervise the judges and justices and to keep an eye on their
track records," Bagir told the Post and Koran Tempo.

Bagir suggested that the judicial commission, which will be
similar to a commission in the Netherlands, should be responsible
to the public and have the power to appraise the judges as well
as to manage their welfare.

Last week, Minister of Justice and Human Rights Yusril Ihza
Mahendra proposed to soon hand over the administration of the
judiciary from his office to the Supreme Court in accordance with
Law No. 35/1999 on the judiciary.

The 1999 law is the latest version of the 1964 and 1970 laws
on the judiciary that, according to Frans Hendra, is a
continuation of the state's dubious stance on the separation of
power among the executive, the legislative and the judicial
bodies.

"In Law No. 19/1964 on judicial authority, the government has
the power to intervene in the courts.

"Although the article was removed from the 1970 revision, it
still allows government intervention by putting the monitoring of
the judiciary in the hands of the Supreme Court and the ministry
of justice," Frans Hendra told the Post on Friday.

Although the new policy may ensure the independence of the
court and the judges, many people fear that this move will
strengthen the impunity of corrupt judges.

Unrelenting criticism has met controversial rulings by judges,
who have been accused of collusion and of insulting people's
sense of justice. The courts have also foiled prosecution against
judges who have been accused of accepting bribes.

Frans Hendra acknowledged that government intervention in the
past had also had a good impact, albeit tiny, especially in
controlling corrupt judges.

"I'm afraid that the country's judiciary will worsen in the
absence of good supervision. Judges will no longer have anything
to fear," he said.

He expected that the judicial commission would comprise
figures with integrity and expertise in legal matters so they can
disregard any signs of intervention.