Supreme Court OKs audit of judges' wealth

Tertiani ZB Simanjuntak The Jakarta Post Jakarta

Taking note of increasing demands for fair trials and clean judges, the Supreme Court has signaled its appreciation of the judicial commission, stipulated in the amended 1945 Constitution, to audit the fortune of judges on a regular basis.

Supreme Court secretary-general Gunanto Suryono said the constitutionally stipulated judicial commission should have sufficient authority to function properly in evaluating judges' performance and behavior.

"I agree that there should be routine checks on the wealth of judges. I'm ready to undergo such an audit," Gunanto told The Jakarta Post at his office here on Tuesday.

The amended Constitution stipulates that the judicial commission be independent and have as its main task the proposing and recruitment of new judges and justices. The commission also has the additional task of upholding the professional standards of judges and justices. The commission's members are appointed by the president with the approval of the House of Representatives.

Gunanto revealed that, as of now, no policy had been formulated to scrutinize judges' wealth.

The issue has been a problem until recently, when many justices faced allegations of taking bribes from those whose cases were being handled by the Supreme Court.

Moreover, the country's notorious courts have been a major source of concern to the international community, especially foreign investors, due to the absence of legal certainty.

A rapporteur for the UN is scheduled to visit the country next week to assess Indonesia's legal system and the independence of its judiciary.

Chief Justice Bagir Manan established last year a new division headed by Justice Mariana Sutadi, whose job was to carry out internal monitoring on errant judges and justices.

But, obviously, high expectations alone cannot empower the Supreme Court's internal monitoring division due to a strong collegiate code of conduct within the judiciary, which may be observed from the division's failure to disclose its investigation results on justices who issued corrupt rulings.

But the verification team has not functioned effectively as nothing significant has happened to the way judges have issued verdicts in cases they were trying. So far, judges are still giving light sentences to those found guilty in big-time corruption cases.