Hindu Civil Society Organisation Supports Constitutional Court Ethics Board Chair in Handling Adies Kadir Case
A civil society organisation representing Hindu communities, Prajaniti Bali, has expressed support for Constitutional Court Ethics Board (MKMK) Chair I Dewa Gede Palguna as he addresses allegations of ethical violations levelled against Adies Kadir.
Wayan Sayoga, Chair of Prajaniti Bali’s Provincial Leadership Board, commended Palguna’s response during a hearing with Commission III of the House of Representatives on 18 February 2026, describing it as appropriate in constitutional terms. According to Sayoga, Palguna’s stance demonstrated how state officials should operate with measured restraint and free from personal interest, factional allegiances, or political affiliations. “We genuinely need more leadership figures like him on the national stage,” Sayoga said in Denpasar on Wednesday, 25 February 2026.
I Made Dwija Suastana, Secretary of Prajaniti Bali’s Provincial Board, raised concerns about the allegations of ethical violations against Palguna, arguing that the complaint’s substance must be examined rigorously. Dwija Suastana warned that the complaint risks becoming a tool of political pressure against the ethical and intellectual independence of judges.
“Judges should not be silenced simply because their views make certain parties uncomfortable,” Dwija stated.
Dwija expressed concern that ethics complaints could be weaponised to discipline constitutional opinions and make judges overly defensive about voicing their views, despite their function being to protect the constitution from abuses of power. He cautioned that what is at stake is not merely one individual but the health of Indonesia’s constitutional culture.
“Rather than becoming caught in confused thinking, it is certain members of Commission III of the House who should have been reported,” Dwija said, referring to their conduct during the parliamentary hearing.
According to Dwija, judicial independence, including that of constitutional court judges, is a constitutional principle that all parties must respect. He cited Article 3 of Constitutional Court Regulation Number 1 of 2023, and urged that the Ethics Board be allowed to work within its authority to investigate and rule on alleged violations of the Code of Ethics and Conduct for Constitutional Judges.
Dwija cautioned members of parliament against intervening in judicial processes, either directly or indirectly, warning that such intervention could be challenged on ethical and legal grounds.
Previously, the Indonesian Student Forum (Formasi) filed a complaint against Palguna with the Ethics Board alleging violations of the Code of Ethics and Conduct for Judges. The report was filed just five days after Palguna refused a request from Commission III of the House to halt the ethics case against Adies Kadir, who had been reported over alleged ethical violations related to his nomination as a constitutional judge.
The complaint contains four substantive points. One concerns Palguna’s participation as a speaker in an online discussion in May 2024, during which he described amendments to the Constitutional Court Law as the greatest disruption in its history. According to Pian Andreo, Chair of Formasi, Palguna’s remarks constituted strong criticism of the House’s legislative body outside official forums.
Formasi also objected to Palguna’s disclosure of the absence record of Judge Anwar Usman in the 2025 annual report, arguing that this violated principles of internal confidentiality and collegial relations by occurring before internal resolution mechanisms were finalised.
Additionally, Formasi alleged that Palguna employed emotional language whilst performing his duties, notably when he stated “my heart is broken” in response to conditions at the Constitutional Court. Formasi viewed this as a lack of objectivity for someone serving as an ethics guardian. The student forum also highlighted Palguna’s previous investigation by an ethics council regarding bribery allegations involving former Constitutional Judge Patrialis Akbar in 2017.
Pian stated that a Constitutional Court Ethics Board Chair must demonstrate flawless moral integrity and consistent ethical maturity. However, Formasi contended that Palguna’s pattern of behaviour risks lowering ethical standards within the Constitutional Court.
“The Chair of the Ethics Board has exceeded the bounds of propriety for his position and demonstrated a tendency towards personalisation of authority that conflicts with judicial independence values,” Pian said.
Speaking to Tempo, Palguna affirmed his readiness to face the complaint, viewing it as a logical consequence of his stance. “If this complaint has arisen because of my position during the parliamentary hearing in protecting the Ethics Board’s independence, then all the more reason I must face it,” Palguna told Tempo on Tuesday, 24 February 2026.