House fails to endorse Constitutional Court bill

House fails to endorse Constitutional Court bill

Kurniawan Hari, The Jakarta Post, Jakarta

The House of Representatives (DPR) broke its promise to endorse
the much-awaited Constitutional Court bill as it failed to reach
agreement with the government on several issues.

The House plenary meeting agreed to organize another meeting
on Aug. 11 to endorse the bill, with the hope that both the
government and the House could come to a common understanding on
contentious issues in the next few days.

The House and government were unable to agree on two issues --
the educational background of justices appointed to the court and
whether or not the constitutional court's decisions could be
contested in court.

With regard to the educational requirement, the government
insisted that someone vying for the post had to have a degree in
law.

Some factions in the House, however, said that having a law
degree was not compulsory and it was more important for
candidates to be professional in their approach and have a good
knowledge of the Constitution.

The second issue was a stipulation in Article 64 that the
court, ranging from the district court to the Supreme Court,
cannot become an object of dispute -- meaning the constitutional
court's decisions must be binding and cannot be contested in
court.

Deputy committee chairman Zainal Arifin of the Indonesian
Democratic Party of Struggle (PDI Perjuangan) disclosed that all
factions had a similar opinion on this issue.

"However, some factions want to insert that article and others
disagree," Zainal told The Jakarta Post.

Although formally only two issues remained unsettled, Minister
of Justice and Human Rights Yusril Ihza Mahendra wanted to
elaborate Article 10 on the authority of the Constitutional Court
to pass judgment on alleged power abuse by the president.

The demand was floated at a meeting of the House special
committee after his meeting with President Megawati Soekarnoputri
and Coordinating Minister for Political and Security Affairs
Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono at the State Palace at 10 a.m.

Article 10 (2) states that the Constitutional Court is obliged
to pass judgment over any allegation of the House that the
president and/or vice president have violated the law in the form
of state treason, corruption, bribery, serious crime or
misconduct, or are no longer fit to remain in office.

Yusril emphasized that there was no clear explanation as to
the definition of "hard crime" or "misconduct."

"We must produce a clear definition. Let us not create a
situation in which the president can easily be impeached simply
by spreading rumors that he or she is guilty of misconduct,"
Yusril said.

Citing an example, Yusril said that gambling was a crime but
misconduct was an ethical matter, therefore the two should not be
mixed up.

At a meeting presided over by chairman Zein Badjeber on
Thursday afternoon, the House special committee deliberating the
Constitutional Court bill agreed to extend its deliberations to
Aug. 5.

Badjeber, of the United Development Party (PPP), said the
government would present proposals on the unresolved issues on
Aug. 2 and the committee would discuss the bill until Aug. 5.

"We hope the bill can be brought to a plenary meeting on Aug.
6. Therefore, there should still be time for the recruitment of
judges," Badjeber said.

Yusril stated that despite a very tight timetable before the
deadline on Aug. 17, the government and legislators would try
their best to set up a Constitutional Court and recruit nine
judges before that date.