T

he Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK) told a hearing at the Constitutional Court on Thursday that a mechanism used to suspend KPK leaders could be misused and may eventually weaken the antigraft body.

The court is currently hearing a judicial review filed by a number of plaintiffs, including a group calling itself the Forum of Legal and Constitutional Review (FKHK) and a group of law students that have challenged the mechanism used to suspend KPK leaders.

Concerned that a mechanism used to temporary dismiss KPK leaders could be used to undermine the antigraft body, the plaintiffs are attempting to get Article 32, paragraph 2 of the 2002 KPK Law scrapped. The paragraph stipulates that if a KPK leader is named a suspect, he or she must be temporarily dismissed.

KPK legal division head Catharina M. Girsang argued during Thursday'€™s hearing that such temporary dismissals had the potential to hamper KPK efforts to eradicate corruption.

'€œSuch a provision should remain as a logical consequence for the special authority KPK commissioners [who lead the antigraft body] have. However, without limitation, it has created legal uncertainty and has the potential to weaken the KPK and hamper efforts to fight corruption,'€ she said.

Catharina told the court that such a mechanism should be limited.

She argued that KPK leaders should only be temporarily dismissed if named suspects in corruption cases or other criminal cases that carried prison sentences of five years or more. Catharina also said the provision should not be applied for offenses that occurred before the persons were appointed KPK leaders.

Last month, President Joko '€œJokowi'€ Widodo temporarily dismissed two KPK commissioners, Bambang Widjojanto and Abraham Samad, after the police named them suspects '€” in what was seen by many the criminalization of the KPK. Bambang was named a suspect in connection with a 2010 perjury case, while Abraham was declared a suspect in a 2007 ID forgery case.

Rivalry between the two institutions broke out after the KPK named a high-ranking police officer, Comr. Gen. Budi Gunawan, a suspect, which led to Jokowi dropping Budi'€™s nomination as police chief.

In the petition, the plaintiffs argue that the mechanism violates the presumption of innocence principle, saying that it could be used as a tool to orchestrate a case against the KPK.

Representing the House of Representatives, Democratic Party lawmaker Didik Mukrianto rejected the petition, arguing that such a provision was a tool to ensure legal certainty.

'€œIt is not an instrument to weaken the KPK, but is aimed at ensuring the KPK remains focused in carrying out its tasks and run as it should,'€ he said during the hearing. '€œNot to mention, it can also [serve as a tool] to maintain KPK'€™s credibility.'€

The Law and Human Rights Ministry'€™s director for legislation, Wicipto Setiadi, who represented the government, said the article did not violate the Constitution and demanded that the court reject the petition.

'€œA temporary dismissal is a fair and proportional move to provide balance between the KPK'€™s authority and tasks,'€ Wicipto said.

Presiding justice Anwar Usman adjourned the hearing until April 20, when expert witnesses will testify.

The plaintiffs plan to present criminal law expert Edward Omar Syarif Hiariej as an expert witness, while the government will present law expert Romli Atmasasmita, one of the writers of the KPK Law.

He was also an expert witness in a pretrial hearing filed by Budi to challenge his suspect status.