C

alls have mounted to choose a new Constitutional Court (MK) chief justice with integrity, particularly given the heavy task the court will be facing this year of hearing possible disputes following the regional elections.

The court’s nine justices are set to select a new leader as the tenure of current Chief Justice Arief Hidayat is slated to end in April.

Activists have raised concerns over Arief’s alleged breach of ethics in connection to his recent reappointment by the House Commission III, which oversees human rights, security and legal affairs.

Arief has been accused of lobbying lawmakers to secure his second term as Constitutional Court chief justice.

Wahidah Suaib, election advisor for the Partnership for Governance Reform, said the new chief justice should be a figure with integrity as stipulated by the Constitutional Court Law.

“Due to indications that the current chief justice violated the code of ethics, we must set a higher standard for the new chief justice,” she said on Wednesday.

The Constitutional Court has been in the spotlight in recent years after its former justices — Patrialis Akbar and former chief justice Akil Mochtar — were sent to jail for corruption.

It is currently handling a number of crucial judicial review requests, including one to scrap the presidential nomination threshold mentioned in the 2017 Elections Law, on the grounds that it restricts the people’s rights to nominate their choice of presidential candidate.

The petition was filed by several election watchdogs, activists and new political parties, including the Peaceful and Benign Islam (Idaman) Party of self-styled king of dangdut Rhoma Irama

“The Constitutional Court’s role is decisive as the guardian of democracy,” said Veri Junaidi from the Constitution and Democracy Initiative, which was among the petitioners supporting to scrap the presidential nomination threshold.

“The court has the final say on the system and regulations of the government.”

It should also speed up the process with which it handles cases as they steadily increase in number each year, he added.

According to data from the Constitution and Democracy Initiative, at least 49 judicial review cases — most of which were filed last year — have yet to be settled by the court.

“Some cases may be left unsettled until next year because the court will receive more election dispute cases and judicial reviews,” Veri said.

Activists, including Veri, have also raised concerns over delays in announcing the Constitutional Court’s ruling of the 2017 Elections Law even though the related hearings had come to an end, fearing that further postponements might be misused by certain parties to secure their interests.

“We, the plaintiffs, expect the court to announce its ruling as soon as possible,” said activist Hadar Navis Gumay, who is a former member of the General Elections Commission (KPU) and one of one of the plaintiffs challenging the threshold.

He further argued that it was important for the court to announce its ruling soon, due to the upcoming regional elections and the 2019 legislative and presidential elections.

The KPU is scheduled to open registration on Jan. 8 for regional head candidates running in the 2018 regional elections.

In mid-February, it will announce the political parties that are slated to participate in the 2019 elections. (ami)