T

he House of Representatives has delayed the endorsement of the revision of the 2004 Judicial Commission (KY) Law due to a protracted debate about sanctions for judges convicted of misconduct.

It had been planned that the bill, which has been on lawmakers’ desks since 2010, would be passed during the House of Representatives plenary meeting on Thursday.

A member of the House’s working committee on the bill, Benny Kabur Harman, said on Wednesday that the scheduled passage of the bill had been cancelled, and that the deliberations would continue.

“We hope we can pass the bill during the next sitting period,” he told The Jakarta Post.

Benny said the bill still lacked clear explanations for violations.

“This is important because each violation can bring a different level of punishment for the judges. Without clear definitions, the judgment on the punishments could be abused and negotiated,” Benny said.

The KY, which is tasked with overseeing judges, suffered a major blow to its authorities when the Constitutional Court in August 2006 granted a request for a judicial review of the 2004 Law filed by 31 Supreme Court justices.

The most significant element in the 2006 ruling saw the KY stripped of the power to investigate alleged violations by Supreme Court and Constitutional Court justices.

The current law stipulates three different levels of ethical violations: light, moderate and severe.

A judge declared guilty of a light violation can face a written reprimand, while a dismissal recommendation can be imposed on a judge convicted of a heavy violation.

Despite the protracted debates on the punishment categorization, Benny confirmed that lawmakers and their counterparts had approved certain revisions that would enhance the commission’s powers.

“The new law will grant the KY the authority to directly punish judges at high and district courts,” Benny said.

At the moment, the KY can only recommend to the Supreme Court that it sanction judges found guilty of ethics violations.

The authority to punish Supreme Court justices, however, will remain with the Supreme Court, Benny said.

According to the current law, the Supreme Court will form a justice ethics assembly consisting of KY members and Supreme Court justices should the commission find a justice guilty of an ethical violation. The assembly will then assess the KY’s finding and determine the punishment.

Benny also confirmed that the proposal to give the KY the authority to wiretap suspected judges had been turned down.

“Wiretapping can only be done by law enforcers, which KY members are not. But the bill stipulates that the commission can ask the police to wiretap suspected judge with the approval of a district court,” he added.

Asep Rahmat Fajar, a spokesperson for the Judicial Commission, acknowledged that the deliberation of the bill still failed to agree on several provisions.

“A meeting on Tuesday night between the government — represented by the director general of the regulations and laws at the Law and Human Rights Ministry Wahiduddin Adams — and the House working committee has agreed to bring the deliberations to the next sitting period,” he told the Post.

Asep echoed Benny’s statement, saying that the discussions about penalties for judges who violated ethics code had prolonged the deliberation.

“They are still arguing whether or not to give us the authority to directly slap light penalties on judges who violate the ethics code,” Asep said.

“However, they have agreed that a severe penalty will only be imposed through a hearing of a panel of ethics. It means that the commission must recommend a penalty to them,” he added.

Asep said that the commission would accept whatever decision because “the commission is only a user.”

“As for the wiretapping authority, they have agreed not to give us that. So, the commission can only ask for help from the institutions authorized to wiretap. They will do it for us,” Asep added.