L

aw enforcement in Indonesia has taken another body blow lately. First came the controversial reprieve granted to drug smuggler Meirika “Ola” Franola by President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono. Now revelations emerge of possible serious professional misconduct by a Supreme Court justice hearing a case review (PK) filed by a convicted drug producer has caught the nation by surprise.

Justice Ahmad Yamani was found to have personally deleted the 15-year prison sentence handed down to Hengky Gunawan by a panel of three PK justices (including himself) and wrote by hand a reduced term of 12-years. The other two justices were Imron Anwari and Nyak Pha. The verdict itself was no less controversial in that it annulled the death sentence previously issued by a different panel of justices, who heard Hengky’s appeal.

Hengky, owner of an ecstasy manufacturing plant in Surabaya, was first sentenced to 17 years imprisonment by Surabaya District Court. Dissatisfied, he appealed the verdict at East Java High Court, only to find the sentence increased to 18 years. He next filed an appeal in the Supreme Court, when the country’s highest judiciary put him on death row.

To the surprise of many, after exposure of Yamani’s “mistake”, the Supreme Court concluded that neither he nor the other two justices were proven to have received bribes and had simply been “negligent” in writing down the verdict.

Yamani suddenly tendered his resignation, citing his ill health, when his case came to the fore.

Members of the legal affairs commission at the House of Representatives suspect a “court mafia” behind Hengky’s lenient punishment and Yamani’s subsequent tampering with the sentence.

The Judicial Commission, the independent body which oversees Indonesian judges, has called Yamani’s altering of the verdict a serious violation of the Code of Ethics and asked the Supreme Court not to accept his resignation. If Yamani’s resignation is accepted the commission will be unable to probe into the case.

The Supreme Court, along with the Judicial Commission, has the opportunity to make a breakthrough by filing a report with the Police against Yamani for forgery of state documents. The commission must investigate Yamani and the two other justices who revoked the death sentence. Yamani’s probe is both urgent and important as he has three times helped annul death sentence for a drug convict.

The question is whether the Supreme Court has the stomach for such a thorough investigation. The tip can clearly be seen. Now is the time to uncover the entire iceberg.