S

ince its establishment in 2005, the Judicial Commission has summoned nine justices to be probed for alleged ethics violations. None answered their summonses, an official said on Friday.

“None of the nine justices ever appeared for our summons, either as witnesses or as the ones who were reported as having violated ethics,” commission spokesman Asep Rahmat Fajar told The Jakarta Post.

The law on the judicial commission mandates the commission to monitor judges and justices. They can accept reports from the public and follow them up by summoning the respective judges or justices.

The commission, which is tasked with overseeing judges, suffered a major blow to its authorities when the Constitutional Court in August 2006 granted a request filed by 31 Supreme Court justices to drop articles that gave the commission the power to investigate judges.

The ruling stated that the commission could investigate indications of ethics violations within the judiciary system, but that the judges would not have to answer the commission’s summons.

Djoko Sarwoko, a Supreme Court justice, told the Post on Friday that justices ignored the commission because he believed the summons were based on unclear reports.

“I believe it was because the reports were unclear. They first have to check what the reports were,” he said. Djoko said the commission often summoned justices only based on reports complaining about technicalities.

“Rest assured, we justices will never answer their summons on merely technical problems,” he said.

“Technical matters include the judges’ verdicts. There’s no way we would comply with a summons over our verdicts. Verdicts have nothing to do with our ethics,” he said.

Djoko was among the nine justices summoned by the commission. He ignored one summons in late 2009 and another in early 2010.

As of July 2011, there were about 50 justices at the Supreme Court. Lower and higher courts across Indonesia employ about 7,000 judges.

The commission said judges had a higher compliance rate with their summonses.

From a total of 367 judges at high and lower courts summoned by the commission from 2005 to 2010, only six failed to comply. As of June, under Eman Suparman’s current leadership, only one judge ignored a summons, while the other 27 judges complied.

“From the total cases, the honorary panel during Busyro’s leadership has slapped penalties on nine judges, while the other one got theirs this year during the leadership of Eman,” said Asep. “None of them are justices.”

From January to June, the commission received 1,722 complaints from the public regarding judges and justices. Since its establishment six years ago it has received 12,077 complaints.

The commission and the Supreme Court signed an agreement to limit the commission’s authority to monitor judges, including justices in 2009, but the commission continues to find justices elusive.

“Their absence means they do not take the opportunity and fulfill their obligation to clarify the commission’s findings against them,” said Asep. “A new regulation, a 2011 Judicial Commission Regulation, allows us to continue processing the complaints using their findings regardless of their absence.”

Without clarification from absent judges, the commission can also make a recommendation on penalties to be conveyed to the Supreme Court, and send copies to the President and the House of Representatives.