Constitutional Court Honorary Council to Rule on Judge Adies Kadir's Alleged Ethical Violations This Week

MKMK to Decide on Adies Kadir’s Fate Regarding Alleged Ethical Violations Soon

• Yeni Lestari/VIVA

Jakarta, VIVA – The Constitutional Court’s Honorary Council (MKMK) will soon decide on the report regarding alleged violations of the code of ethics and conduct, as well as conflicts of interest, involving Constitutional Court Judge Adies Kadir this week.

Chairman of the MKMK, I Dewa Gede Palguna, explained that they are currently holding a meeting of judges (RPH) after hearing testimony from the complainant and questioning the reported party last week.

“We are currently in the RPH. I will let you know (the schedule for the hearing to announce the decision). Yes, it is planned for this week,” said Palguna, quoted by ANTARA, Wednesday, 25 February 2026.

Although he has not yet revealed the detailed schedule, Palguna confirmed that the hearing to announce the decision will be held publicly. “The procedural law stipulates this,” he said.

Previously, on Thursday, 19 February 2026, the MKMM had questioned Adies Kadir, who was reported for allegedly violating the code of ethics and being involved in a conflict of interest in his nomination as a Constitutional Court judge proposed by the DPR RI.

Palguna stated that he could not explain further about the content of the testimony provided by Adies Kadir or other matters investigated regarding the Constitutional Court judge proposed by the DPR RI.

Adies Kadir’s testimony was heard after the Honorary Council held a preliminary examination hearing with the agenda of hearing testimony from the complainant on Thursday, 12 February 2026.

Adies Kadir, among others, was reported by 21 professors, lecturers, and practitioners of constitutional law who are members of the Constitutional and Administrative Law Society (CALS).

He was reported because his nomination as a Constitutional Court judge proposed by the DPR RI was allegedly in violation of the code of ethics and guidelines for the conduct of Constitutional Court judges, as well as regulations.

In its report, CALS argued that the nomination of Adies Kadir as a Constitutional Court judge to replace Arief Hidayat was inappropriate because it was done after Commission III of the DPR RI had selected another candidate, namely Inosentius Samsul.

In addition, CALS also believes that Adies Kadir, with his background as a politician, has the potential for a significant conflict of interest when adjudicating cases, whether it be judicial review of laws or disputes over election results.

Therefore, CALS, through its report, requests that the MKMK dismiss Adies Kadir from his position as a Constitutional Court judge.