MKMK Chairman Reported to Ethics Council Amid Adies Kadir Investigation
The chairman of the Constitutional Court’s Honour Council (MKMK), I Dewa Gede Palguna, has been reported to the MKMK on allegations of breaching the code of ethics and conduct for constitutional court justices.
The complaint was filed by the Indonesian Student Forum (Formasi), which contends that Palguna’s actions as MKMK chairman have exceeded the bounds of ethical propriety for his position.
In its complaint, Formasi raised several key points. Among them, the forum highlighted Palguna’s statement that he would rather be dismissed than disclose the substance of an ethics report concerning Constitutional Court Justice Adies Kadir during a meeting with the House of Representatives (DPR) some time ago.
Additionally, Formasi argued that Palguna violated principles of internal confidentiality and collegiality by publicly disclosing Justice Anwar Usman’s attendance records in the 2025 annual report. This was deemed unethical as it was done before any final resolution through internal mechanisms.
In response, Palguna stated that the complaint would not interfere with the ongoing investigation into Adies Kadir’s appointment as a Constitutional Court justice.
Palguna said the MKMK would continue processing the complaint against Adies even though he himself had been reported to the council.
“The complaint will in no way disrupt the MKMK’s work. We are working as usual. The procedures are well-established,” Palguna said, as quoted on Sunday (22 February).
He said the complaint against Adies had now entered the judges’ deliberation meeting (RPH) stage.
Palguna also confirmed that proceedings had progressed to the point of hearing testimony from Adies as the reported justice.
“We have now entered the RPH stage to determine whether these complaints merit advancement to the hearing examination stage or not,” he said.
Palguna had previously been invited to attend a meeting by House Commission III on Wednesday (18 February). During the meeting, several Commission III members criticised Palguna for not revealing the status of complaints regarding Adies Kadir’s appointment as a Constitutional Court justice nominated by the DPR.
They requested that Palguna disclose the complaints. However, Palguna refused, asserting that the confidentiality of the complaint’s substance was integral to the MKMK’s independence.
He even firmly stated he would rather step down than reveal the details of the complaint before members of parliament.
Palguna emphasised that the substance of the complaint against Adies was confidential between the complainant and the MKMK.
“If that is what you are asking, I would rather request to be dismissed from the Honour Council. Seriously, because that is the crown jewel of the Honour Council, sir,” Palguna said during the meeting.
Several days later, the DPR’s 14th Plenary Session closing the third session period announced that the MKMK had no authority to follow up on the complaint against Adies.
The outcome of the meeting was set out in Commission III leadership letter number B/117/PW.01/2/2026 dated 18 February 2026, regarding the communication of the conclusions from the Commission III meeting to be read at the plenary session.
“Therefore, the MKMK does not have the authority to follow up on complaints related to the selection mechanism for constitutional court justices by all nominating institutions, including that conducted by the DPR regarding Prof. Dr. Ir. Adies Kadir, S.H, M.Hum,” Speaker Puan Maharani read out the meeting’s conclusions at the closing plenary session.
Commission III requested that the MKMK remain consistent in exercising its authority under Article 27A of Law Number 7 of 2020 on the Constitutional Court. The law limits the MKMK’s duties solely to enforcing the code of ethics and conduct for sitting constitutional court justices.