Junior Registrar I of the Constitutional Court, Muhidin, speaking at an audience with Ombudsman on Wednesday (10/10) in the Meeting Room of the Constitutional Court. Photo by Humas MK.

The Constitutional Court received Ombudsman delegates for an audience on Wednesday (10/10/2018) at the Constitutional Court. Several structural and functional officials of the Constitutional Court—Junior Registrar I Muhidin; Head of Public Relations and Protocol Bureau Rubiyo; Inspector Tatang Garjito; Head of the Registrar\'s Office Legal and Administration Bureau Kurniasih Panti Rahayu; Head of Infrastructure, Network, and Communication Mula Pospos; and Head of Public Relations and Domestic Cooperation Department Fajar Laksono. The Ombudsman visited the Court to study the services the Constitutional Court provides for justice seekers.

In his presentation on the Constitutional Court and its authorities, Junior Registrar I Muhidin explained the Constitutional Court as a judiciary that acts passively in that it only receives petitions. Therefore, the Court sought to serve the parties who litigated at the Constitutional Court to the best of its abilities. One of the measures taken by the Court to make it easier for parties to litigate is by utilizing information technology advances. This was chosen as a way to help petitioners to litigate during a limited time. "How can the Constitutional Court protect the constitutional rights of the litigants? This system was built in collaboration with the Registrar\'s Office and the Secretariat General of the Constitutional Court," Muhidin said before the Ombudsman staff.

Muhidin explained about several applications released by the Court to facilitate services for litigants, such as SIMPEL, case tracking, minutes, video conference, etc. He gave an example of the SIMPEL feature accessible at the Court’s website (www.mkri.id). SIMPEL (electronic services management information system) is a feature that can be used by the petitioners to submit an online petition. The Constitutional Court’s location, only in Jakarta, is expected not to become a barrier for justice seekers to litigate in the Constitutional Court. He also talked about the case tracking feature that helps litigants monitor the progress of their petitions.

Execution of Court Decisions

Related to the request of Dominikus Dalu, an Ombudsman representative, who discussed the reports submitted to the Ombudsman. He mentioned the number of reports that come in with the limitation of 14 days to follow up on incoming reports. "So, we have to tell how the reports will be followed up on. We are not as restricted as the Constitutional Court. At each stage, we can finish it. If it cannot be resolved, it will be mentioned in the Ombudsman\'s recommendation. Not many of these recommendations were issued, but there is no implementation," he explained.

Head of Public Relations and Domestic Cooperation Department Fajar Laksono explained that the Court does not have an instrument to execute its decision. According to him, the implementation of the Court decisions is a problem experienced by all constitutional courts in the world. He mentioned that the decisions of all constitutional courts in the world are final and binding because they are single courts. The execution of the Constitutional Court\'s decisions, Fajar added, depends on the legal culture in the country. He said as the enforcer of the Constitution, the Constitutional Court should be respected and its decisions must be carried out. "Moreover, one of the conditions for a country to become a state of law is to respect and implement judicial decisions. So, everything comes down to the legal culture," he explained.

Fajar believes that the Indonesian judiciary has the duty to improve the legal culture in the country. He added that although the Constitutional Court does not have any decision-execution instrument, its position is parallel to the 1945 Constitution. “The Constitutional Court’s decisions are living constitution. When there is respect (in the legal culture), there will be no need for any instrument of the execution of the Court’s decisions,” he said.

In relation to complaints submitted to the Court, Inspector Tatang Garjito said that on February 2017 an inspectorate was established through the Presidential Decree No. 65/2017. The inspectorate consists of two parts: the financial oversight and the performance oversight. “Complaints are forwarded to the Inspectorate, but complaints related to the constitutional justices will be handled by the Inspectorate and the ethics board. We provide recommendation box, e-mail, social media, and a whistle blowing system (WBS),” jelas Tatang. (Lulu Anjarsari/Yuniar Widiastuti)