J

AKARTA: A recent research by the Judicial Commission and university researchers has found that many judges both at district and high courts level are still producing ‘‘poor’’ verdicts with inconsistent logic.

“The inconsistencies that we found refers to the verdicts which had many incriminating considerations during the trial’s reasoning process, but turn out sentencing light verdict,” judicial commissioner Jaja Ahmad Jayus told press conference on Tuesday.

Of a total of 100 court ruling observed in 2010, 44.12 percent are considered poor verdicts while in 2011, the number was increased to 54.9 percent from a total of 152 rulings.

A contributing researcher, F.X. Joko Priyono, said that there was a case, which put four years imprisonment charge, with a lot of incriminating considerations but the verdict turn out only two years imprisonment.

“For example, many ‘soft’ court’s ruling on illegal logging cases which in fact have a big and destructive impact also influence many people,” he said.  

He added that progressive rulings were hard to find especially in corruption cases as most of the poor verdicts were merely a flat ruling.