'Judiciary independence never compromised'

JAKARTA (JP): Chief Justice Sarwata denied over the weekend charges that the judiciary had given its independence to the bureaucracy.

At a rare press conference after the breaking of the fast at his office, Sarwata said that even President Soeharto had promised not to interfere in the judiciary.

"The president gave his personal guarantee to me last November," said Sarwata, who was appointed chief justice by presidential decree in November.

Critics have questioned the judiciary's independence because the courts had almost always decided in favor of the government and the powerful.

Sarwata rejected the idea of centralizing the judiciary's management under the Supreme Court instead of sharing it with the Attorney General's Office.

He argued that Indonesia did not strictly adhere to the principles of Trias Politica (the separation of powers into three branches: legislative, judicial and executive bodies).

Observers hope that clear separation of powers will improve the judiciary and legislature.

Sarwata said, "All three bodies work toward a common goal, hand in hand. For instance, a Court doesn't have its own state- owned company, therefore it is financially dependent on the executive which proposes the judiciary's budget to the legislature.

"However, never to date and never in the future will the other branches of power intervene in the judiciary's independence," he said.

Many legal experts and practitioners, the latest being the Indonesian Jurists Association, have suggested that the judiciary be managed by the Supreme Court alone instead of in conjunction with the Ministry of Justice.

Experts believe the judiciary will be more likely to be independent under "one-roof" management.

The Ministry of Justice administers the judiciary, including the salaries and appointment of judges, whereas the Supreme Court manages judicial technicalities. Experts said this made the courts bias toward the government.

Frequently cited cases of bias include the Supreme Court's decisions on land appropriation for the construction of Kedungombo Dam in Central Java and the imprisonment of labor leader Muchtar Pakpahan.

On Kedungombo Dam, then chief justice Purwoto S. Gandasubrata overturned in 1994 an earlier ruling by justice Asikin Kusumah Atmadja that favored 34 Central Java residents affected by the dam's construction.

Asikin ruled in 1993 that the government had violated the law by starting construction of the dam in January 1989 before the residents had agreed to compensation.

Late last year, then chief justice Soerjono overturned a decision by Justice Adi Andojo Soetjipto that exonerated Pakpahan of charges of inciting labor unrest.

Sarwata said the Supreme Court was determined to process its backlog of 16,599 cases. The Court aimed to process 10,000 cases a year so that by the year 2000 it would only have a "normal" backlog of cases. (08)