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.
Plaintiffs struggle to obtain evidence in attempt to challenge revised KPK Law
Change Size
Former commissioner of the Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK) Erry Riyana points his finger at a hearing challenging the 2019 law on the KPK at the Constitutional Court on Jan. 8, 2020. (JP/Seto Wardhana)
L
awyers representing a coalition of civil society groups that are challenging the controversial 2019 Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK) Law have complained about difficulties in securing evidence to support their petition for a judicial review of the recently enacted law.
The plaintiffs, who aimed to challenge the revised version of the 2002 KPK Law at the Constitutional Court, said they were unable to provide evidence as requested by the court’s judges during a hearing on Wednesday because they did not get access to the necessary documents, said Viola Reinida, one of the lawyers.
She said the lawyers had asked the House of Representatives for documents on the deliberation between lawmakers and government representatives of the law revision, but instead were told by the House Information and Documentation Management Division (PPID) that the evidence was for internal documentation only and not for publication.
“However, when we requested the meeting summary on the House sessions deliberating the draft revision of the KPK Law throughout the year 2019, the PPID gave us the 2016 document. That’s irrelevant to our initial request,” Viola added.
The judicial review of the 2019 law was filed on Nov. 20, 2019, by then-KPK chairman Agus Rahardjo and his two deputies, Laode M. Syarif, and Saut Situmorang. Their move immediately won the support of former KPK commissioners Mochammad Jasin and Erry Riyana Hardjapamekas, who joined as plaintiffs petitioning for a judicial review at the Constitutional Court.
As they failed to present enough evidence as required by the Court, presiding justice Arif Hidayat gave them until the next hearing session on Jan. 14 to provide the evidence.
Muhammad Isnur, another lawyer representing the coalition, accused both the government and legislative body of being uncooperative during the deliberation period for the revised law.
