The Indonesian Prosecutors Association (PJI) requested material review of sanctions for public prosecutors who commit administrative misconduct in exercising their authority on juvenile cases. The review of Article 99 of Law No.11/2012 on Juvenile Justice System (SPPA Law) was held on Tuesday (19/9) at the Plenary Hall of the Constitutional Court. Noor Rachmad and others, who worked as prosecutors and are listed as PJI members, are Petitioners of case No. 68/PUU-XV/2017.

The Petitioners, represented by Ichsan Zikry, claimed that their constitutional rights were violated by the enactment of Article 99 of the SPPA Law which states: "Public Prosecutor who deliberately neglect his/her obligations as referred to in Article 34 paragraph (3) shall be punished with imprisonment of maximum 2 (two) years."

According to the Petitioners, Article 99 of the SPPA Law has the potential to convict public prosecutors who conduct maladministration in exercising their authority in a juvenile case. The article is considered intervening the independence of prosecutors, when administrative misconducts of a prosecutor should be accountable to their superiors in the structure and level of supervision been provided by the legislation as stipulated in the Attorney General Law.

"Article 99 of SPPA Law has lead to legal uncertainty and is against the provisions in the Attorney General Law, which basically guarantee the independence of prosecutors in performing their duties, functions, and authority in carrying out their duties in the field of prosecution," he explained before the Panel of Justices led by the Constitutional Court Justice Saldi Isra.

In addition, the Petitioners considered that convictions for administrative violations should not be monitored and corrected by the judiciary, in this case is criminal justice. Correctional supervision by a criminal justice for such offense can be regarded as intervention by power. Therefore, the Petitioners requested that the Constitutional Court revoke the enforcement of Article 99 of the SPPA Law.

Justices’ Advice

In response to the request, the Panel of Justices consisting of Constitutional Justices Maria Farida Indrati and Wahiduddin Adams gave suggestions for revision. Justice Saldi as Chairman of the Panel of Justices suggested that the Petitioners describe their legal standing. He mentioned that there were two legal positions used by the Petitioners in the petition, so he suggested it be focused.

“Please emphasize the legal standing because there are two, as citizens and association of prosecutors. It should be pointed out that both have the legal standing to file this petition. Please clarify it," he advised.

The Petitioners were given 14 days to revise the petition. The next hearing was scheduled for the revision of the petition.

(Lulu Anjarsari/lul/Yuniar Widiastuti)