House at odds over constitutional court

M. Taufiqurrahman, The Jakarta Post, Jakarta

Approaching the July 31 deadline for the endorsement of the bill on the constitutional court, the House of Representatives and the government have yet to decide on a number of contentious issues.

However, members of the working committee tasked with deliberating the bill said on Tuesday that they were determined to hammer out an agreement during the House's extraordinary plenary session scheduled for July 31.

Committee member Pataniari Siahaan of the Indonesian Democratic Party of Struggle (PDI Perjuangan) said that if necessary the House could hold a vote during the plenary session.

"Whatever the outcome of the working committee is, it has to be presented to the special committee for endorsement," he said.

Currently, House members and the government are still at odds over two issues -- the voting mechanism among the justices and their educational background.

Committee deputy chairman Zaenal Arifin of the PDI Perjuangan faction said the committee was still divided over the voting mechanism. "Some want a simple majority while others prefer an absolute majority," he said.

For an absolute majority, court rulings would need the approval of two-thirds, or six, of the nine justices, while a simple majority would only need the support of at least five justices.

The largest faction in the House, the PDI Perjuangan, favors an absolute majority for court decisions pertaining to judicial reviews and the impeachment of a sitting president. Whereas for rulings on other issues mandated by the amended constitution, such as dissolving political parties and settling disputes over ballot counts, the court would need only a simple majority.

By contrast, the Golkar faction wants all decisions of the court to be based on a simple majority.

Andi Matallata of the Golkar faction said that all the duties of the court were of equal importance, and therefore the same voting mechanism should apply to all issues.

As for educational background, lawmakers still have different views as to whether or not a candidate justice should hold a law degree.

The amended 1945 Constitution mandates the establishment of the court, which will have the authority to settle disputes over ballot counts, conflicts between laws and the Constitution, disputes between state institutions, be able to dissolve political parties, and to give final judgment on violations committed by the president as alleged by the House of Representatives.

The court will consist of nine judges, with the government, the Supreme Court and the House entitled to choose three each.

Earlier, members of the committee had accepted the composition and powers of the planned constitutional court as spelled out in the newly amended constitution.

As for the selection of justices, the committee will assign House Commission II on legal and home affairs to set the procedures and start the nomination process as soon as possible.