House Commission III Summons Constitutional Court Ethics Council Over Adies Kadir's Appointment as Justice

House Commission III invited the Constitutional Court’s Ethics Council (MKMK) to a meeting concerning the appointment of Adies Kadir as a Constitutional Court justice. Commission III chair Habiburokhman had previously stated that the matter of Adies Kadir’s appointment was neither within the MKMK’s purview nor its mandate.

The meeting was held in the Commission III meeting room at the Nusantara II building, Senayan, Jakarta, on Wednesday (18/2/2026). Habiburokhman began by explaining the purpose of summoning MKMK chairman I Dewa Gede Palguna and his team to the House.

“More specifically, this meeting’s agenda concerns the MKMK’s decision to receive and follow up on public complaints regarding the process of nominating a constitutional justice proposed by the House of Representatives, namely Mr Adies Kadir,” Habiburokhman said in his opening remarks.

Habiburokhman then cited Article 27a of Law Number 7 of 2020 on the Third Amendment to Law Number 24 of 2003 on the Constitutional Court. He stated that the MKMK’s duties did not extend to overseeing the House’s selection of constitutional justice candidates.

“The MKMK’s task is to uphold the code of ethics and standards of conduct for constitutional justices. The selection and nomination process of Mr Adies Kadir as a constitutional justice candidate proposed by the House is certainly not within the MKMK’s purview or mandate,” he said.

Habiburokhman also explained that the House holds an allocated quota for selecting Constitutional Court justices, a prerogative enshrined in the 1945 Constitution.

“Article 24c paragraph 3 of the 1945 Constitution explicitly stipulates that constitutional justices are nominated by three branches of power: the House of Representatives, the President, and the Supreme Court. This provision is not merely procedural but reflects a constitutional philosophy that the Constitutional Court must be composed of figures from diverse backgrounds — political, executive, and judicial. Accordingly, the House’s authority to select constitutional justices is not an anomaly but rather an integral part of the checks and balances design,” he stated.

The fit and proper test conducted by the House for Adies Kadir, through to the decision taken at the plenary level, was also discussed during the meeting. Habiburokhman maintained that the House had not violated any regulations.

Additionally, the meeting addressed the earlier resignation of previously selected justice candidate Inosentius Samsul, who withdrew due to another assignment. This meant Commission III had to find a replacement urgently, as Constitutional Court justice Arief Hidayat had already reached his retirement date on 2 February 2026.

On that basis, Habiburokhman argued that the selection of Adies Kadir was fully in accordance with prevailing laws and regulations. He then invited Gede Palguna to respond to his statements.

“To save time, we shall give the floor to the chairman of the Constitutional Court Ethics Council to present his explanation and remarks,” he added.