Agung not guilty in Supreme Court bill, ethics council finds

The Jakarta Post ,  Jakarta   |  Mon, 05/04/2009 2:08 PM  |  National

An internal disciplinary council has ruled in favor of House of Representatives Speaker Agung Laksono over the controversial passage of a Supreme Court bill by the legislature last December.

Agung was found not guilty by the House's disciplinary council of violating internal regulations when he presided over a plenary meeting to endorse the bill that extended the retirement age of Supreme Court judges from 65 to 70 years.

"We have observed the case thoroughly and we found no evidence that Pak Agung violated any internal House's regulations during the endorsement process. Therefore, the council finds him not guilty," council chairman Irsyad Sudiro told The Jakarta Post on Saturday.

Agung was reported to the disciplinary council by the Indonesian Corruption Watch (ICW), who accused him of violating an internal code of ethics when he passed the bill, even though the number of House members attending the plenary session was not sufficient.

According to Article 206 of House regulations, a plenary meeting must reach quorum to be able to pass a bill into law.

The retirement age extension for justices was also rejected by the Indonesian Democratic Party of Struggle (PDI-P) and some lawmakers from other parties.

Despite the objections from various stakeholders in the public and within the House itself, Agung decided to endorse the Supreme Court law.

The PDI-P and the ICW criticized the move taken by Agung as a "rushy and one-sided" decision by the House speaker.

But this was denied by the House disciplinary council. "Agung's decision to pass the law was based on the fact that most factions had agreed to it," Irsyad Sudiro said. "And the council's decision is final, so the case ends here and now," he added.

In response, ICW coordinator for legal affairs and court monitoring Emerson Yuntho said his side was very disappointed with the decision. "But we will have to accept it as there is no legal mechanism to appeal against it," he said.

"This shows that there is an attempt from within the House to justify whatever decision taken by it. If this kind of justification continues, then it will become a bad precedent for the House in the future," he added

A survey conducted by the Judicature Monitoring Commission (KPP) along with the ICW, two months prior to the plenary meeting, showed that most Indonesians opposed the proposal to increase the retirement age.

Emerson had said the newly passed law was not in line with the rejuvenation of the Supreme Court because the public needed fresh faces of justices to boost its credibility and reputation.

Legal experts similarly said that allowing justices to stay in office until the age of 70 years would obstruct reforms within the country's judicial system, dubbed the most corrupt in Asia.

Former prominent justices, including Bismar Siregar and Bustanul Arifin, were among those opposed to the extension of the retirement age of Supreme Court judges.

The move would only lead to the worsening performance of justices and an ineffective career system at the court, they added.

Some observers have also raised concerns that the rush passage of the bill could mean the legislators involved in the deliberation may have been bribed. (hdt)

Copyright © 2008 The Jakarta Post - PT Bina Media Tenggara. All Rights Reserved.