Judicial Commission Urged to Improve Public Communication After Data Mishap

Abdul Fickar Hadjar, a criminal law lecturer at Trisakti University, believes the Judicial Commission’s (KY) error in conveying information regarding 121 violations of the Code of Ethics and Guidelines for Judicial Conduct (KEPPH) reveals weak information governance within the oversight body. According to him, the mistake could diminish the KY’s authority as the institution that supervises judges.

Fickar said the error, which led KY Chairman Abdul Chair Ramadhan to apologise to Supreme Court Chief Justice Sunarto and judges across Indonesia, should never have happened.

“Yes, it is entirely possible this happened due to carelessness. But beyond that, it is an indication of weak information governance in a public institution, particularly one that functions as an oversight body like the KY,” Fickar told Media Indonesia on Monday (3/8).

According to him, as an established oversight body, the KY should have a more careful public communication mechanism so that the information conveyed does not cause misunderstanding.

“This should not have happened because it will inevitably affect the standing of this judicial oversight institution in particular, but also of oversight bodies in general,” he said.

Furthermore, Fickar noted that compared with other oversight bodies, such as the National Police Commission and the Prosecutors’ Commission, the KY has in fact been regarded as a more mature institution. For that reason, the incident must be taken as material for serious evaluation.

“The KY is considered an established oversight body compared with other oversight bodies that still feel amateurish, like the Police Commission and the Prosecutors’ Commission. That is why this weakness is a valuable lesson for the KY’s performance going forward,” he said.

Furthermore, Fickar said the apology conveyed by the KY chairman is insufficient if it is not followed by improvements to institutional governance. He even felt the incident reveals problems with the quality of human resources within the KY. Fickar also assessed that the quality of commissioners is important so that the relationship between the KY as supervisor and the Supreme Court as the supervised institution remains balanced without reducing the independence of each institution.

“This is to avoid an unbalanced pattern of relations with the institution or the people being supervised,” he said.

He further stressed that coordination between the KY and the Supreme Court should be built on the basis of equality as fellow state institutions. However, in the context of judicial ethics oversight, the KY must still be given room to carry out its function optimally.