Supreme Court may let police examine wayward judges

Supreme Court may let police examine wayward judges

Muninggar Sri Saraswati, The Jakarta Post, Jakarta

In a move to tackle corruption in the judiciary, the Supreme
Court is mulling the possibility of allowing police investigators
to question judges allegedly involved in bribery without having
to wait for approval from the court's disciplinary committee.

"I think the disciplinary committee should focus on cases
involving violations of the judge's code of ethics and code of
conduct. If the case deals with bribery allegations, then it is
the responsibility of the police to investigate," Chief Justice
Bagir Manan said on the sidelines of the launch of a judicial
reform blueprint.

The move, he added, was necessary in an attempt to eliminate
public accusations that the disciplinary committee only operated
as an internal mechanism to protect judges involved in crimes.

"I believe that a neutral body, in this case the police,
should be authorized to investigate bribery within the judiciary.
Apart from preventing public accusations, judges (on the
committee) are not specifically trained to investigate crime,"
Bagir told reporters on Thursday.

Bagir has frequently complained about bribery in the courts.

In its latest Corruption Perception release, the Berlin-based
Transparency International again rated Indonesia among the most
corrupt countries in the world. Corruption watchdogs in Indonesia
have noticed that such crimes have been rampant not only in the
bureaucracy, but in the judiciary and legislative bodies.

The Supreme Court has always had a disciplinary committee to
investigate certain violations, including alleged corruption,
involving judges. In most cases the committee has simply
exonerated judges from any wrongdoing, thus preventing the police
from taking up an investigation.

Many believe that members of the committee, who are also
judges, are unable to put their esprit de corps aside, which
hinders their ability to make an objective decision against their
fellow judges.

One of the most prominent examples was a decision by the
Supreme Court's disciplinary committee earlier this year to
exonerate three judges from the Jakarta Commercial Court who were
alleged to have taken bribes following their controversial
verdict that declared Canada-based Manulife insurance firm
bankrupt. The committee's decision meant that the police had no
recourse or mandate to investigate further.

The committee's recommendation forced the Ministry of Justice
and Human Rights to lift the suspension imposed on them shortly
after the case surfaced last year. The verdict of Judge Tjahyono,
CH Kristri Purnamiwulan and Hasan Basri had sparked controversy
as Manulife was proven to be very healthy and solvent.

In 2001, three Supreme Court justices evaded prosecution
despite confessions from a middleman who admitted to bribing them
for Rp 200 million to win his client's case. The justices filed a
defamation lawsuit against the middleman, and he, not the judges,
was eventually convicted and sentenced to three months in jail.

Bagir said the judicial reform blueprint was also intended to
build an independent, transparent and reputable judiciary.

Among other things, Bagir said, the court would focus on
establishing a system of transparency in the courts to enable the
general public to observe their performance.

"I have ordered the courts to provide any information
requested by scholars or any other parties," he said, adding that
the court was currently developing an information system on the
judiciary.

The Supreme Court is also moving to reform its administration
of cases.

The lengthy and complicated procedures have been blamed for
contributing to the existence of "the judicial mafia". The
complicated procedures have also resulted in some 16,000
currently backlogged cases.