Ikahi accused of snubbing public
JAKARTA (JP): Lawyers expressed their dismay with the recommendations that came out of last week's Indonesian Judges Association (Ikahi)'s 13th national congress, which they said ignored the public demand for judicial reform.
"It is disappointing. Instead of opening the door for public involvement in the recruitment of judges, IKAHI recommended a recruitment system completely devoid of public involvement.
"Now there is no hope for the people to see an improved judiciary," lawyer Frans Hendra Winarta of the Indonesian Institute for Independent Judiciary told The Jakarta Post on Tuesday afternoon.
Frans and Todung Mulya Lubis of Judicial Watch Indonesia also criticized the congress for giving weight to the matter of judges' welfare while failing to address such issues as the establishment of a judicial court and the eradication of corruption in the judiciary.
The association ended its congress last Friday by issuing several recommendations, including the revision of Supreme Court Law No. 14/1985, particularly the articles dealing with justices.
It suggested Article 7, Sentence 1(g) be revised to allow a high court judge to be appointed a Supreme Court justice regardless of the length of his or her tenure. The article currently states that a judge must serve five years on the high court before becoming eligible for appointment to the Supreme Court.
They also recommended that Article 8, Sentence 3 be revised to give the justices the power to elect a chief and deputy chief justice through a plenary session. The article now says the justices can only nominate the chief and deputy chief justice, and the nominees must then be screened by the House of Representatives and approved by the president.
Another recommendation from the congress was that career judges be given priority in appointments to the Supreme Court, with noncareer justices being considered for the court only in exceptional cases.
The judges opposed the use of a fit-and-proper test in the appointment of Supreme Court justices who are career judges. They said only noncareer judges should be obliged to go through a screening process.
House of Representative's legislator Ferry Mursyidan Baldan said the fit-and-proper test gave candidates the opportunity to make public what they wished to accomplish on the Supreme Court, and was not meant to pass judgment on the capabilities of the candidates.
"Ikahi does not have to feel threatened by our screening process. Their recommendations are irrelevant anyway since we have the authority," Ferry, the deputy chairman of House Commission II for home and legal affairs, told the Post by phone from Banjarmasin, South Kalimantan.
Lubis said the association's objections to the screening process reflected the fact they were afraid their profession was being taken over by noncareer judges.
"It is hoped that in the future there will be an external judicial commission to run the screening process and to monitor the justices to ensure we have the best guardians as our last bastion of the judicial system," he told the Post.
"Such a judicial commission would also help avoid horse- trading among the parties in the House during the selection of justices," Lubis added.
During the congress, it was suggested that judges be made state officials and their salaries multiplied in order to fight corruption in the judiciary.
"Theoretically it could work, but only if there was already a binding integrity charter among the judges, as well as judicial watchdogs," Lubis said.
He also suggested that judges be the first to report their personal wealth to the National Commission on State Officials Assets, and be required to file a new report annually.
Sixty-one participants proposed to the congress that the monthly salary of district court judges be increased from between Rp 3 million and Rp 4 million to Rp 15 million, and that the salary of high court judges be increased from Rp 5 million to Rp 25 million. They also proposed Supreme Court justice be paid Rp 40 million from the current Rp 12 million they receive.(bby)