DPR Member Responds as Constitutional Court Ethics Council Declares It Cannot Reject Complaint Against Adies Kadir

Golkar faction member of DPR Commission III, Soedeson Tandra, has argued that the Constitutional Court Ethics Council (MKMK) should have rejected the complaint against Constitutional Court Justice Adies Kadir on the grounds that it did not meet the necessary requirements. However, MKMK Chairman I Dewa Gede Palguna affirmed that his body cannot reject such reports.

Palguna initially explained that the MKMK is currently only conducting a preliminary examination of the complaint against Adies Kadir. He noted that the preliminary examination would determine whether the report proceeds to an ethics hearing or not.

“The preliminary examination essentially leads to two outcomes, as we have already conveyed. It can either proceed to a hearing examination, or it can go directly to a ruling, as you enquired about earlier,” Palguna said during a meeting with DPR Commission III at the DPR building in Senayan, Jakarta, on Wednesday (18 February 2026).

Palguna stated that the council would hear testimony from Adies, as the reported justice, the following day. He said that rejecting the complaint outright would contravene the Constitutional Court’s own rules.

“The process we have outlined is that we are currently still at the preliminary examination stage. We have not yet examined the matter — tomorrow we will afford the reported justice the right to have their testimony heard,” he said.

“We also cannot dismiss it from the outset, as some of you have suggested, because the procedural rules stipulate otherwise. We must examine it first. There was a question earlier — we cannot answer them one by one — someone asked, ‘Why wasn’t it dismissed from the start on the principle of administrative law?’ We are bound by procedural rules,” he continued.

He explained that the MKMK would accept a complaint provided the complainant and the reported party are clearly identified. According to him, the preliminary examination constitutes a verification process for public complaints.

“Please read the rules carefully. If there is clarity regarding who the applicant is, who the complainant is, who the reported justice is, and what evidence has been submitted, we have no grounds to refuse registration. According to the procedural rules, under Constitutional Court Regulation Number 11 of 2024, once a complaint is registered we are obliged to examine it. What kind of examination? A preliminary examination,” he said.