T

he Supreme Court has demanded clarity over the sanctions for judges who commit misconduct in the amendment to the Judicial Commission Law.

Court Justice M. Hatta Ali said that his office is fully aware of the necessity for the oversight but demanded clarity regarding what the conditions and procedures would entail.

“The conditions should be clear, including what actions are regarded as light, moderate or severe violations, what the punishments are and how they decide whether the actions have breached the ethical code,” he said.

As opposed to the existing judicial system design in which judges are supervised by the Supreme Court, the proposed law revision would give the authority to the Judicial Commission (KY).

Rampant corruption cases implicating judges have raised doubts about the quality of the court’s internal supervision.

The House of Representatives was scheduled to pass the amendment in the last sitting period but failed to do so since it has yet to settle the judge punishment articles as well as a proposal for possible wiretapping authority by the Judicial Commission.

The KY and the court have engaged in a long debate about the authority of the KY on these two issues.

Tjatur Sapto Edy, head of the House of Representatives’ working committee on the bill, said the law would be an important basis for the country’s judicial reform.

“Their job is supervising the ethical violations. Leave other matters for us to handle,” he said.

KY commissioner Suparman Marzuki said that ideally the KY should supervise all aspects of judges.

“We should not merely supervise the ethical, but also supervise the professional conduct,” he said.

He said that professional supervision was necessary to prevent judges from abusing their judicial position.

“Judges may not receive bribes, which makes them free from violating ethical codes, but they still can manipulate cases by taking sides or by prejudicial questioning of defendants. Those are examples of professional misconduct,” he said.

In July 2011, Bandung Industrial Relations Court judge Imas Dianasari was caught allegedly accepting Rp 200 million (US$23,400) in bribes from Odih Juanda, a manager at PT Onamba Indonesia, a company involved in a graft case at the appellate court.

One month before, Central Jakarta Commercial Court bankruptcy judge Syarifuddin who was caught allegedly accepting Rp 250 million in bribes from Puguh Wirawan, the curator in the confiscation process of PT Skycamping Indonesia.

Another case was revealed last December when former Tangerang District Court judge Muhtadi Asnun — who acquitted graft suspect Gayus H. Tambunan — was sentenced to two years in prison for receiving US$40,000 in bribes from Gayus. (lfr)