T

he House of Representatives is set to revise the 2004 Judicial Commission Law this week to give the commission authority to sanction corrupt judges.

The revised law is expected to end disputes between the commission and the Supreme Court, which now serves as the sole internal inspector of the judges.

Tjatur Sapto Edy, head of the working committee for the law’s deliberation, said the revisions would empower the commission.

“[House commission III overseeing legal affairs] has put in some provisions that will strengthen the commission, particularly in carrying out its duty of supervising judges in upholding their code of ethics,” he said.

The National Awakening Party politician confirmed that the House would likely pass the bill during the next plenary session on Tuesday.

Established in August 2005, the commission has had scuffles with the Supreme Court over the overlapping authority to monitor judges and justices.

In early 2006, tensions escalated as the commission proposed a plan to re-select all 49 Supreme Court justices as part of reforms to the country’s corrupt judicial system.

The commission suffered a major blow to its authority when the Constitutional Court in August 2006 granted a judicial review of the 2004 law to drop the commission’s power to investigate judges.

Petitioned by 31 court justices, the appeal appeared to limit the commission’s authority in several ways.

The ruling reduced the commission’s authority to investigate ethics violations within the judiciary while also revoking the commission’s oversight of Constitutional Court justices.

The latest spat between the commission and the Supreme Court was regarding the murder case of businessman Nasrudin Zulkarnaen in which former antigraft body Antasari Azhar was convicted.

The Judicial Commission has observed the case and recommended that the Supreme Court sanction the panel of judges who presided over the Antasari trial because they had ignored critical evidence.

The court decided to overrule the recommendation.

On Thursday, the working committee at the House law commission agreed to all the proposed materials in the draft.

“The commission expects the new revision to eventually clarify and separate the authority of each institution, the commission and the Supreme Court, mainly related to the mechanism of the imposition of sanctions,” commission spokesman Asep Rahmat Fajar told The Jakarta Post on Saturday.

The revision will authorize the commission to directly sanction judges who violate the code of conduct.

The existing law only allows the commission to forward penalty recommendations to the Supreme Court. Those recommendations are non binding, leaving it up to the court whether to comply or not.

“The revision stipulates that penalties other than permanent discharge will be automatically imposed if the Supreme Court does not respond in 60 days,” Asep said. “However, should there be a dispute between us and the Supreme Court over our recommendations, we must together conduct a follow-through investigation.”

While the current law only outlines three penalties—written reprimand, suspension and permanent dismissal—the revised law will include verbal reprimands, pay reductions and promotion delays.

It will also allow the commission to force a summons of a witness, an authority it does not currently have.

Asep mentioned three other new provisions that would give more authority to the toothless commission: to establish a representative or liaison at local levels, to conduct a selection of ad-hoc judges at the Supreme Court and to supervise judges’ capacity building.

Asep said the commission appreciated the revisions.

“To some extent, the materials are much more advanced than the existing law,” he said.