Here is an excellent article below published in the Jakarta Post that describes the extent to which gross inequity, corruption and graft is rampant and pervasive in the Indonesian Judiciary (Courts).
When I was in Indonesia I actually had a meeting with a high ranking judge (who shall remain nameless) who wanted to set up a "referral" program with me whereby I would refer certain cases to the judge where the aggrieved party or litigant would pay a bribe for a "guaranteed outcome" of their case. I couldn't believe what I was hearing !! I walked away from that meeting refusing to engage in any such illegal, immoral and unethical chicanery such as that. PREPOSTEROUS & OUTRAGEOUS!!
My editorial remarks appear in blue text.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Through social media networks,
thousands of (mostly young) judges called
for a movement to save the Indonesian judiciary last month.
The
movement, initiated by judge Sunoto of the Aceh Tamiang District Court
via a Facebook group called Rencana Peserta Aksi Hakim (Judges Action
Plan),
aims to save the Supreme Court from the mafia, clean up the
judiciary corps, promote judges of integrity and help reform-minded
judges prosper.
This movement is timely, following a series of
cases plaguing the Supreme Court and the entire judiciary force,
including the arrest of Corruption Court judges who were caught
accepting bribes in Semarang, the ambush of a judge who was enjoying
drugs and lately, the sudden resignation of a Supreme Court justice held
responsible for changing a jail sentence for a convicted drug producer.
This
moral call has harvested support, if not a positive response, from the
public. A number of figures from the Judicial Commission, the
Constitutional Court, the House of Representatives and universities have
urged the Supreme Court to immediately conduct internal correction and
improvement.
Pressure is mounting on the court to improve its
transparency, uphold justice and pay more attention to the moral
integrity and capability of judges.
Public criticism and
pessimism toward the country’s judiciary system apparently stem from
three major problems facing Indonesian courts: low quality,
inconsistency and a lack of moral integrity in judges. (
perhaps someone needs to study what is going in law schools, where ideals; principles, Code of Ethics, & Standards of Conduct should all be instilled from the very beginning!)
Concerning
the first two challenges, the newly-introduced chamber system, which
has come into effect since October last year, should have offered an
answer. The chamber system aims to improve the quality of judgments and
maintain the consistency of verdicts in similar cases. But it seems the
Dutch-imported system needs much more time and a stronger commitment to
take effect.
In this case,
the role of outsiders is needed to
help the Supreme Court maintain uniformity of judgments. (
Agreed, the public needs to become more involved and demand the removal of any Justice who does not adhere to strict Code of Ethics & Standards of Conduct) In New South
Wales, for example, this role is played by the local Judicial Commission
whose core function is to ensure consistency in handing down sentences.
This is crucial since consistency in decisions, according to former
chief justice of Australian High Court, CJ Murray Gleeson, is the most
important and most difficult part of the administration of justice.
As
for moral integrity, which the public perceives as elusive, Indonesian
judges need to act to prove their commitment to a clean justice system,
something which can only start from themselves. (
Wrong! It all starts in law school first) There at least four
alternative actions they may take into consideration.
First, the
judges have to play a role as a “broom” in their respective offices.
Each judge is expected to “clean up” his or her office and prevent any
irregularities from occurring. To act as a broom,
they have to ensure
that they themselves are “clean” before turning their attention to
others. (
practice what you preach)
Second, signing an integrity pact. The commitment to a
clean judiciary system should be documented as proof in the form of,
among others, an integrity pact. Under this pact, for instance, a judge
will state his readiness to immediately step down and take punishment
once she/he is found guilty of corrupt practices.
Third, playing a
whistle blower role against corrupt judges.
Rampant bribery and other
criminal cases involving judges indicates that judges’ oversight bodies,
such as the Judicial Commission and Supreme Court Supervisory Body,
need more power to effectively conduct their jobs. Promoting a whistle
blowing culture within the judiciary is a feasible solution.
Finally,
intervention with judges’ independence, which may come from both
internal and external parties, must be put to an end. Judges need legal
protection from any form of intervention. A law of anti-contempt of
court will help establish an independent judiciary. In this context, the
Judicial Commission and Supreme Court should actively push for the
enactment of the law.
Despite the challenges and weaknesses, the
Supreme Court is not without its achievements. In September 2011, the
Central Information Commission named the Supreme Court the most
transparent among state institutions dealing with law enforcement and
justice. The court is also the sixth most transparent public institution
in the country.
Sebastiaan Pompe, an observer from the
Netherlands, said in his article (The Jakarta Post, March 29, 2011) that
the Supreme Court was the most transparent public institution in the
country, given the fact that it had published tens of thousands of court
judgments online. The number, Pompe said, far exceeded the verdicts
published by the Supreme Courts of the US, the Netherlands and Australia
combined over the past decade. (
just because you publish tens of thousands of court rulings doesn't affirm or make the Court "transparent" - you would have to go back and "audit" each case to affirm it's final case disposition and everything that transpired during the entire litigation or judicial process was "transparent", just and uniform)
It is true that corrupt judges
still exist but it is not fair to judge the judiciary corps based on
misconduct committed by a small number of corrupt and immoral judges.
There are still many judges who are intelligent, clean and of high
integrity. (
You just contradicted yourself! If the majority of judges where "clean and of high integrity" then your statement should have said MOST instead of many!)
Corrupt judges must be punished severely, but make
sure to give credit and reward to good judges. (
I vehemently disagree! Why should we have to "reward" a person who has been appointed to a position of public trust or public office for doing the right thing which is what they're supposed to be doing in the first place!) Let us save clean and
progressive judges and protect Indonesian courts for the sake of a
respected judiciary corps. (
Strongly disagree again! You should be doing this for the PEOPLE of the Republic of Indonesia and for fundamental fairness and equity in the Judiciary, and NOT do it for sake of the Judiciary itself!)
The writer is a judge at the
Bekasi Religious Court and LLM candidate at Melbourne Law School, the
University of Melbourne, Australia. The opinions expressed are his own. (
Religious Court ?! Minister of Religious Affairs ?! - if you had true "freedom of religion", or freedom from it, and the Gov't was more secular then all that would not be necessary, would it?)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Here are some related articles which are clearly demonstrative of Indonesia's corrupt Judiciary:
