Report reveals corruption in court is organized

Berni K. Moestafa, The Jakarta Post, Jakarta

Corruption within the country's judiciary is glaring and well- organized, involving all players in the legal system, and is faced by justice seekers at every stage of court procedures, a survey reveals.

Called Unveiling Court Mafia, the report by the Indonesian Corruption Watch (ICW) depicts a failing justice system epitomizing the country's faltering reform movement.

It said money and not justice was the currency in many courts.

"The court mafia is systemic because it (corruption) and the legal system have almost become intertwined," said the report, a copy of which The Jakarta Post obtained on Monday. "After years of letting corruption spread, it has become systemic."

The report added that the chain of corruption in the judiciary did not stop at the Supreme Court -- the last resort for justice seekers.

ICW's report comes amid a United Nations (UN) mission looking into the country's judicial independence.

Last week UN special rapporteur on the independency of judges and lawyers, Dato Param Cumaraswamy said Indonesia's justice system was in serious strife, admitting the situation was worse than expected.

"No matter how small the power of a court official is, it has the potential of becoming a commodity of corruption," ICW's report said.

"Court mafia involves all actors ... from the police, court administrators, lawyers, prosecutors, to judges and prison guards,"

ICW conducted the study for about a year, conducting interviews in courts in cities like Jakarta, Medan, Surabaya and Yogyakarta.

It said that although the ways officials extracted money from their victims varied in different cities, the patterns were always the same.

At a criminal court, corruption begins when filing a case with officials who ask for variable registration fees. Once court proceedings begin, lawyers can choose favorable judges while most "lucrative" cases are handled directly led by the district court chief.

Verdicts are then subject to negotiations either through the service of the prosecutor or directly with the judges. "If one does it through prosecutors, it (negotiation) comes in one package. They will arrange everything from the charges to the verdict," the report said.

When judges postpone a verdict, it is a signal for a defendant to see the judge. Judges also ask for "hard work money" in cases where the defendant faces serious charges.

There is also the "marathon court hearing" where all comes arranged: witnesses, evidence, judges' questions and defendants' answers. Sometimes defendants are free to skip their trial because lawyers have prepared their statements.

A convicted person may also negotiate an appeal with the higher court, or contact prosecutors to have the court's verdict delayed.

In a civil court, the pattern is similar with additional fees such as gratitude money for judges, and the trading of verdicts where some judges go for the highest bidder.

Corruption at commercial courts follows the same pattern but may also include fictitious creditors, and the appointment of favorable court receivers or curators.

At the prosecutors' office, money can speed up or slow down an investigation, raise or reduce charges, and mean prison or city arrest.

"Prosecutors ask whether a defendant has enough money and if so, will extort him to the limit," the report said.

ICW's report follows a string of recent controversial verdicts and court proceedings casting public doubt over the credibility of Indonesian courts.

Among the recent cases was the bankruptcy verdict against Canadian-based insurance firm PT Asuransi Jiwa Manulife Indonesia (AJMI) -- a company the government declared solvent. The Supreme Court overturned the verdict earlier this month.

One of the three judges in the Manulife case later admitted to have received gratitude money in previous cases, but refused to call it corruption.

ICW chairman Teten Masduki said bribery money had shifted to the courts as it was harder to buy decisions from government officials due to the aggressive legislature and more powerful regional governments.