A

survey published by the Setara Institute, a democracy watchdog, has found that the public wants the creation of a separate court to handle local election disputes and remove authority from the Constitutional Court.

Ismail Hasani, a researcher at the institute, said that based on the survey, the Attorney General'€™s Office (AGO) should handle local election disputes by establishing an ad hoc court specifically for the disputes.

Respondents also suggested that the establishment of the ad hoc court should be incorporated into the Local Elections Law, which is currently being deliberated by the House of Representatives.

'€œThe time is right to seriously consider some breakthrough policies,'€ Ismail said.

The Setara Institute published its survey on the 10-year performance of the court on Monday.

The survey aggregated opinions from 200 respondents from various backgrounds, including experts, activists and plaintiffs in local election disputes who filed a judicial review with the court.

The survey is part of a major study on the court and its 281 rulings.

Respondents of the survey are of the opinion that the government must consider a number of breakthrough policies, including creating a special court dedicated to processing local election disputes, as well as reforming the court'€™s recruitment process.

The survey found that the quality of the court'€™s rulings has deteriorated over the years due to the heavy burden placed on the court to settle large numbers of election disputes.

The survey also found that over the years, the approval ratings for the Constitutional Court chief justice had also deteriorated.

Jimly Asshiddiqie, the court'€™s first chief justice got an approval rating of 94.9 percent, while his predecessor Mahfud MD got 89.7 percent. While Akil Mochtar, who was dismissed following a bribery allegation received an 80 percent approval rating.

Respondents also thought that in spite of the current slump, the court will eventually be able to regain the public'€™s trust.

The survey found that 71.8 percent of the respondents agreed that there should be an oversight body on the court.

According to the survey, respondents suggested that the court must regulate the recruitment process for not only its justices but also for its technical staff, who have an impact on the quality of its rulings.

The respondents of the survey also suggested that court justices must release wealth reports of their families more frequently in an effort to regain the public'€™s trust.

Setara Institute chairman Hendardi said that the court needs to be more consistent in its rulings.

Hendardi said that the court could make better use of its resources by not handling similar cases of election disputes.

'€œConsidering the courts limited resources, it has to prioritize which cases it handles,'€ Hendardi said.

He said the President, the House and the AGO was also to blame for the problems that were affecting the court. (asw)