Supreme Court OKs audit of judges' wealth

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.