TheJakartaPost
Please Update your browser
Your browser is out of date, and may not be compatible with our website. A list of the most popular web browsers can be found below.
Just click on the icons to get to the download page.
House’s plan for judge evaluation raises red flag
Change Size
The nine justices of the Constitutional Court sit during a hearing. (JP/Seto Wardhana)
T
he House of Representatives is once again in the spotlight for tinkering with the Constitutional Court’s independence following a proposed amendment that will allow the House to evaluate court justices without stipulating clear standards to regulate such a process.
Critics say this will further threaten judicial independence following lawmakers’ recent unwarranted dismissal of justice Aswanto.
Lawmakers have insisted on pushing another controversial revision to the Constitutional Court Law that would allow the House, the president and the Supreme Court to evaluate every five years, or at any time as necessary, each of the three sitting justices they appoint. The planned revision does not specify a clear mechanism on how to evaluate the justices. The proposal will also lower the minimum age for justices from 55 to 50, but retain their retirement age at 70 years.
The plan was put on the table in a House plenary meeting in late September, the same time when the lawmakers removed Constitutional Court deputy chief justice Aswanto before his tenure ended and despite the House not having the authority to remove a justice. The dismissal of Aswanto, a two-time House appointee who had backed the court's rulings declaring key House legislative products unconstitutional, drew accusations of legislative overreach.
The government is still finalizing its response, including to the controversial provisions on the evaluation of iudges. It has until Friday to send feedback to lawmakers before the government and the lawmakers sit together to discuss the bill.
Dhahana Putra, acting director general for legislation at the Law and Human Rights Ministry, stopped short of commenting on whether the government would oppose the House's plan for justice evaluation.
“The government thinks that the judiciary must be independent without any intervention. We will build [our arguments] on this principle," he said.
