Welcome Guest   |  Login   |   Signup
JG Logo
Sat, May 26, 2012
Archive Search

What Next for Indonesia's Criticized Antigraft Courts?
Ulma Haryanto | December 30, 2011

Share This Page
0
0
0
0
Share with google+ :


Post a comment
Please login to post comment

Comments

Be the first to write your opinion!

The Judicial Commission is looking at two options in response to the string of questionable acquittals of graft suspects in anticorruption courts outside Jakarta.

“The commission is currently monitoring the regional courts closely with the Supreme Court, to see whether it is best to regionalize or centralize,” Jaja Ahmad Jayus, one of the commissioners, said at a press conference on Wednesday.

Calls to disband the courts have come from different public officials, including the respected chief justice of the Constitutional Court, Mahfud M.D., and Justice Minister Amir Syamsuddin.

They were reacting to news that regional anticorruption courts have handed out 40 acquittals within just one year of their establishments.

The regional graft-fighting courts were a product of the Law on Anti-Corruption Courts, which was passed in 2009 and stipulated that courts dealing with corruption cases be established in all districts across the country. The Supreme Court is responsible for establishing the courts, seven so far, including selecting the judges.

“It is not an option to disband the regional courts entirely since it was a mandated by the law,” Jaja said.

“What we can do is to improve the system, including the judge selection process, looking at their track records and backgrounds. Also important is their moral integrity.”

The commission has interviewed judges, lawyers and graft suspects, and done public surveys in a number of courts.

“The aim of the research was actually to find a method for the Judicial Commission to oversee the three most problematic courts in the country, namely the antigraft courts, the tax courts and the industrial relations courts,” Jaja said.

According to Affan Tojeng, a staff member at the commission involved in the research, the Supreme Court is not transparent enough when selecting judges for the anticorruption courts.

“If they involved the public, it would minimize the likeliness of getting faulty judges,” he said.