Judicial independence widely misinterpreted

Judicial independence widely misinterpreted

JAKARTA (JP): Minister of Justice Oetojo Oesman said yesterday
that "judicial independence" had been widely misinterpreted to
mean that judges were immune to government action when they
failed to do their jobs correctly.

Judges were supervised by the justice ministry and the Supreme
Court in the form of consultation, the minister said when opening
a one day workshop on judicial freedom.

The seminar, co-organized by the Justice Ministry and the
Supreme Court, was attended by some 250 people, including judges,
lawyers, legal observers, and scholars.

Oetojo dismissed as untrue claims that judges were lacking in
independence because they were controlled by the government via
the justice ministry.

He said that, even in western democracies like the U.S., the
Netherlands and France, judges were supervised by more than one
agency and remained, nevertheless, independent.

Quoting a statement made by President Soeharto at the opening
of a chief justices' congress recently, Oetojo said that,
although judges were supposed to be independent, that did not
mean that they should not have relations with government
agencies.

"On the contrary, they (the judicial system and the
government) should develop cooperation and do their jobs
independently as the 1945 Constitution requires," he said.

Indonesia has three laws concerning judicial independence.

Oetojo said that there had been persistent demands that only
the Supreme Court supervise judges, as a means of ensuring their
independence.

But excluding the Justice Ministry from the system of
supervision was impossible, he said, because the Supreme Court
was not authorized to handle non-judicial matters.

The demands had, however, been accommodated in the 1986 law on
the judicial system, which required judges to consult the
ministry and the Supreme Court on the appointment, retirement,
promotion and transfer of judges, he said.

Oetojo said that when a judge had to reach a "fair" verdict,
the question was not whether the judge was independent or not, or
whether he was a civil servant or not, but whether he decided the
case in accordance with his conscience.

The real question, he said, was: "Does the judge have the
courage to fight for justice?"

Chief Justice Soerjono, who also addressed the gathering,
agreed with Oetojo.

He said that, in court, decision-making was in the hands of
the judge and not subject to external interference.

"We already have a good supervisory system for judges, with
the presence of laws regulating the judicial system," Soerjono
said.

"However, fair judicial decisions will depend on each
individual judge." (imn)