Global Integrity Report

Indonesia Home

Facts

Timeline

Notebook

Integrity Scorecard

2008 Assessment

Indonesia: Integrity Indicators Scorecard

Indonesia : Integrity Scorecard Report > Sub-Category: Judicial Accountability
Indicators		Score
36	Are judges appointed fairly?	92
37	Can members of the judiciary be held accountable for their actions?	67
38	Are there regulations governing conflicts of interest for the national-level judiciary?	32
39	Can citizens access the asset disclosure records of members of the national-level judiciary?	92

Indicator and sub-Indicator Details

Are judges appointed fairly?

36a: In law, there is a transparent procedure for selecting national-level judges.

Score:

YES

Comments:

References: Article 14 (1) Law No.22 Year 2004 about Judicial Commissions. [ LINK ]

36b: In practice, professional criteria are followed in selecting national-level judges.

Score:

100

Comments: Judicial Commission has the authority on this matter. This is the only task of this commission.

References: Prof. Koerniatmanto Soetoprawiro, Faculty Member, Parahyangan Catholic University, Faculty of Law, August 7 2008, UNPAR Aula Bandung.

Sulastio, Director, Indonesian Parliamentary Center (IPC), August 11 2008, at IPC's office, Jakarta.

Peer Review Comments: In practice, not all candidates are career judges. Some candidates are from academia.

36c: In law, there is a confirmation process for national-level judges (i.e. conducted by the legislature or an independent body).

Score:

YES

Comments: Judicial candidates are proposed by the Judicial Commission (KY/Komisi Yudisial) to the legislature for its approval. After that, judges are confirmed by the president.

References: Article 24A (3) Indonesia Constitution (UUD 1945). [ LINK ]

Can members of the judiciary be held accountable for their actions?

37a: In law, members of the national-level judiciary are obliged to give reasons for their decisions.

Score:

YES

Comments:

References: Article 197 Law No. 8 Year 1981 Concerning The Law of Ciminal Procedure. [ LINK ]

37b: In practice, members of the national-level judiciary give reasons for their decisions.

Score:

100

Comments:

References: Gatot Rianto, Chairman, Bandung Legal Aid Institute, August 7 2008, Bandung.

Abdurrahman Feraz, S.H., Lawyer, Narcoz and Co (Legal Aid Institute), August 8 2008, Bandung.

37c: In law, there is a disciplinary agency (or equivalent mechanism) for the national-level judicial system.

Score:

YES

Comments: The supreme court has the mandate to discipline judges. This court conducts internal control over judges. There is no external control for the judges.

References: Article 32 (1) Law No. 5 Year 2004 Concerning Change for Law No. 14, Year 1985 Concerning the Supreme Court. [ LINK ]

37d: In law, the judicial disciplinary agency (or equivalent mechanism) is protected from political interference.

Score:

YES

Comments:

References: Article 2 Law No. 5 Year 2004 Concerning Change for Law No. 14, Year 1985 Concerning Supreme Court. [ LINK ]

37e: In practice, when necessary, the judicial disciplinary agency (or equivalent mechanism) initiates investigations.

Score:

100

$Scoring Criteria :: 100 Score Criteria: The judicial disciplinary agency (or equivalent mechanism) aggressively starts investigations -- or participates fully with cooperating agencies\' investigations -- into judicial misconduct. The judicial disciplinary agency (or equivalent mechanism) is fair in its application of this power. 50 Score Criteria: The judicial disciplinary agency (or equivalent mechanism) will start or cooperate in investigations, but often relies on external pressure to set priorities, or has limited effectiveness when investigating. The judicial disciplinary agency (or equivalent mechanism), though limited in effectiveness, is still fair in its application of power. 0 Score Criteria: The judicial disciplinary agency (or equivalent mechanism) rarely investigates on its own or cooperates in other agencies\' investigations, or the judicial disciplinary agency (or equivalent mechanism) is partisan in its application of this power.$

Comments: The judicial disciplinary agency for the national-level judicial system is carried out by Supreme Court. This agency is doing internal control for judicial system. Because this agency does internal control, in fact it is difficult to initiates investigations.

Per the 2008 Bertelsmann Transformation Index for Indonesia: "Recently, signs of overlapping functions in some newly formed judicial institutions, such as between the MK (Constitutional Court) and the KY (Judicial Commission), and between KY and MA (the Supreme Court) have become visible. Most recently, the KY and MA wrangled over the appointment of Supreme Court judges."

References: Paper on National Seminar. Dr. John Pieris, August 7 2008, Strengthening the power of judiciary, capacity building, and controlling judges to create law enforcement and judicial institution.

Interview with academics (Prof. Koerniatmanto Soetoprawiro, Faculty Member, Parahyangan Catholic University, Faculty of Law, August 7 2008, UNPAR Aula Bandung.

Bertelsmann Transformation Index 2008 for Indonesia: [ LINK ]

Peer Review Comments: Previously, the Judicial Committee initiated investigations against judges who are allegedly abuse their power. For instance:

TEMPO Interaktif, Jakarta: Judiciary Committee (KY) will form a team of three to investigate judges of Court of Denpasar who issued a verdict of three months in prison for Michelle Leslie, an Australian model. [ LINK ] /hg/nasional/ 2005/ 12/05/brk, 20051205-70128,id.html

Jakarta,19/9/2007 KY - High Court (PT) of Bali form a Fact Gatherer Team (TPF) to track missing files of State Court (PN) of Denpasar on cases of alleged Copyright Law violation.

37f: In practice, when necessary, the judicial disciplinary agency (or equivalent mechanism) imposes penalties on offenders.

Score:

100

References: Update Document, Febri Hendri and Adnan, January 2008, Indonesia Corruption Outlook 2008, [ LINK ]

Prof. Koerniatmanto Soetoprawiro, Faculty Member, Parahyangan Catholic University, Faculty of Law, August 7 2008, UNPAR Aula, Bandung.

Bertelsmann Transformation Index 2008 for Indonesia: [ LINK ]

Peer Review Comments: The judicial disciplinary agency does not impose sanctions, only recommendations.

Are there regulations governing conflicts of interest for the national-level judiciary?

38a: In law, members of the national-level judiciary are required to file an asset disclosure form.

Score:

YES

Comments: Every public official must file an asset declaration form before and after occupying public office.

References: Chapter IV: Rights and Obligations of State Officials, Article 5 (3) Law No. 28 1999

38b: In law, there are regulations governing gifts and hospitality offered to members of the national-level judiciary.

Score:

YES

Comments: Gifts and hospitality to public officials could be considered a bribe if not reported to the Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK).

References: Article 12B and 12C, Law No. 20 Year 2001 about Change For Law No. 31, Year 1999 about the eradication of corruption. [ LINK ]

38c: In law, there are requirements for the independent auditing of the asset disclosure forms of members of the national-level judiciary.

Score:

YES

Comments:

References: Interview with NGO representatives (Sulastio, Director, Indonesian Parliamentary Center (IPC), August 11 2008, at IPC's office Jakarta.

38d: In law, there are restrictions for national-level judges entering the private sector after leaving the government.

Score:

YES

$Scoring Criteria :: YES: A YES score is earned if there are regulations restricting national-level judges\' ability to take positions in the private sector after leaving government that would present a conflict of interest, including positions that directly seek to influence their former government colleagues. NO: A NO score is earned if no such restrictions exist.$

Comments:

References: Interview with academics, Prof. Koerniatmanto Soetoprawiro, Faculty Member, Parahyangan Catholic University, Faculty of Law, August 7 2008, UNPAR Aula, Bandung.

38e: In practice, the regulations restricting post-government private sector employment for national-level judges are effective.

Score:

100

Comments: There is no regulation on this matter. Many judges become lawyers as soon as they are eligible for pensions.

References: Prof. Koerniatmanto Soetoprawiro, Faculty Member, Parahyangan Catholic University, Faculty of Law, August 7 2008, UNPAR Aula, Bandung.

38f: In practice, the regulations governing gifts and hospitality offered to members of the national-level judiciary are effective.

Score:

100

Comments: In 2005 KPK (Corruption Eradication Commission) arrested 5 (five) Supreme Court staff for bribe case.

References: Update Document, Febri Hendri and Adnan, January 2008, Indonesia Corruption Outlook 2008, [ LINK ]

Paper on National Seminar. Dr. John Pieris, August 7, 2008, Strengthening the power of the judiciary, capacity building, and controlling judges to create law enforcement and judicial institution.

Peer Review Comments: I think the regulations at least impede high judges from receiving gratuities. In addition, for cases in which Supreme Court verdicts apply, penalties for corruptors who received gratuities are mostly more severe.

38g: In practice, national-level judiciary asset disclosures are audited.

Score:

100

Comments: there is no regulation on this matter.

References: Sulastio, Director, Indonesian Parliamentary Center (IPC), August 11 2008, at IPC's office, Jakarta.

Peer Review Comments: Every state official has to report his/her wealth, but no independent audit is required.

Can citizens access the asset disclosure records of members of the national-level judiciary?

39a: In law, citizens can access the asset disclosure records of members of the national-level judiciary.

Score:

YES

Comments: Citizen can get this records at KPK's office.

References: Article 5(7) Decision of Corruption Eradication Commission No. 02, Year 2005 about How to Register, Announce, and Examine State Official Assets (LHKPN / Laporan Harta Kekayaan Penyelenggara Negara).

39b: In practice, citizens can access judicial asset disclosure records within a reasonable time period.

Score:

100

Comments: Both have experience on accessing asset disclosures in under three days.

References: Suhud Darmawan, Editor, Bandung Institute of Governance Studies (BIGS), August 4 2008, Bandung. Dwi Saputra, Founder of KP2KKN (NGO focusing on monitoring and combatting corruption) August 25, 2008, in Semarang.

Peer Review Comments: Citizens cannot access the records directly; they must go through the Commission of Corruption Reduction (KPK). The KPK actually collects the records from judicial bodies and makes them available to public. The process for receiving records from the KPK is relatively fast.

39c: In practice, citizens can access judicial asset disclosure records at a reasonable cost.

Score:

100

Comments: The above sources have been able to access this data freely.

References: Dwi Saputra, Founder of KP2KKN (NGO focusing on monitoring and fighting corruption), August 25, 2008, in Semarang.

Suhud Darmawan, Editor, Bandung Institute of Governance Studies (BIGS), August 4, 2008, at Bandung.

Peer Review Comments: Citizens cannot access the records directly; they must go through the Commission of Corruption Reduction (KPK). The KPK actually collects the records from judicial bodies and makes them available to public. KPK has never charged for access to specific data, and even copies are free.