Fri, 15 Oct 2004

Ministry to submit criminal law amendment bills to House

Muninggar Sri Saraswati, The Jakarta Post, Jakarta

The Ministry of Justice is expected to submit bills on the amendment of the Criminal Code and the Criminal Law Procedures Code to the House of Representatives later this year in a bid to plug a number of loopholes that have damaged legal certainty in the country.

Andi Hamzah, who heads the justice ministry team drafting the bills, told reporters on Thursday that the ministry planned to submit the bills to the House for deliberation in December.

"We will first submit the Criminal Code amendment bill and then the Criminal Law Procedures Code amendment bill the next day," he said after a discussion on the latter.

The planned Criminal Code bill has sparked controversy as it also deals with private matters and morality, including casual sex, witchcraft and black magic, Marxism-Leninism, oral sex and sodomy, as well as the key area of contempt of court.

A legacy of the Dutch, who colonized the country for more than 350 years, the existing Criminal Code (KUHP) is frequently criticized as being outdated and repressive. The ministry has said that the amended Criminal Code will reflect the values prevalent in Indonesian society.

Unlike the Criminal Code, the existing Criminal Law Procedures Code (KUHAP) is a home-grown Indonesia product. It was drafted in the early 1980s to replace the HIR, the Dutch criminal law procedures code. At first, it was praised as a landmark in the country's legal development, but later became the target of criticism for the large number of loopholes and inconsistencies it contained.

Unfortunately, the new Criminal Law Procedures Code bill still appears to contain many loopholes of a similar ilk. For example, it allows the prosecution to file for review of a conviction that has been upheld on final appeal by the Supreme Court -- a right originally intended to benefit convicted persons, or their heirs and successors.

Article 257 (1) of the bill says that convicted persons or their heirs and successors may petition the Supreme Court for a review.

Rudy Satriyo Mukantardjo of the University of Indonesia School of Law criticized this article for failing to explicitly prohibit the prosecution from seeking futher reviews of convictions already upheld by the Supreme Court.

"It should clearly stipulate that only convicted persons or their heirs and successors can petition the Supreme Court for a review as the purpose of this extraordinary legal procedure is to protect the interests of convicted persons," he said.

The right of the prosecution to file for a judicial review has heightened fears of possible moves to free corruptors whose convictions have already been upheld by the Supreme Court.

In a number of high-profile corruption cases, the prosecution has asked the courts to overturn convictions for apparently spurious reasons.

In contrast to Rudy, Ramelan, an adviser to the Attorney General's Office, said that the power of the prosecution to file for a review by the Supreme Court was essential.

"Because it has happened in the past," he said, referring to the Supreme Court's decision in the New Order era to overturn the acquittal of Muchtar Pakpahan of treason charges following the filing of a petition by the prosecution.

Despite the fears of loopholes, the Criminal Law Procedures Code bill does hold out the prospect of some improvements, such as the setting of time limits within which court clerks must forward case files from the district court to the high court, or vice versa, and to the parties involved, to a maximum of two days.

Prosecutors often complain that they are unable to bring convicted persons to jail as they have not received copies of verdicts due to failures by court clerks to deliver them in a timely fashion.