---

Panel examination hearing of the judicial review of the Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK) Law, Monday (2/12) in the Plenary Courtroom of the Constitutional Court. Photo by Humas MK/Gani.

JAKARTA, Public Relations of the Constitutional Court—Law No. 19 of 2019 on the Second Amendment to Law No. 30 of 2012 on the Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK) potentially violates the principle of rule of law and judicial independence. This was revealed in the preliminary examination hearing of the judicial review of the KPK Law held by the Constitutional Court on Monday (2/12/2019). The petition No. 77/PUU-XVI/2019 was filed by 12 Petitioners, who are advocates, anti-corruption activists, and law students.

On behalf of the Petitioners, Jovi Andrea Bachtiar, Titanio Hasangapan Giovanni Sibarani, and Faiz Abdullah Wafi argued that Article 12B paragraphs (2), (3), and (4); Article 12C paragraph (1); Article 21 paragraph (1); Article 37A paragraph (3); Article 37B paragraph (1) letter b; Article 47 paragraphs (1) and (2); and Article 69A paragraphs (1) and (4) of the Corruption Eradication Commission Law violate their constitutional rights. Jovi explained more clearly that the Petitioners challenge the KPK supervisory council and its recruitment. According to them, the KPK is a state institution formed to improve the effectiveness of corruption eradication efforts.

Jovi explained that the revision of the KPK Law prioritized the formation of a supervisory council, but its position and authorities set forth in the KPK Law led to interventions against perpetrators of corruption in the judicial process. "So, the supervisory council could damage the principles of the rule of law as stipulated in the 1945 Constitution," Jovi said before a hearing chaired by Constitutional Justice Manahan M. P. Sitompul, with Deputy Chief Constitutional Justice Aswanto and Constitutional Justice Wahiduddin Adams in the Plenary Courtroom of the Constitutional Court.

The Petitioners also petitioned Article 51A paragraph (5) and Article 57 paragraph (3) of Law No. 24 of 2003 on the Constitutional Court as well as Article 10 paragraph (1) and Article 23 paragraph (1) letter b of Law No. 12 of 2011 on the Formation of Legislation. The Petitioners believe that the Constitutional Court Decision No. 73/PUU-IX/2011 interpreted the judicial authority, which includes all activities related to law enforcement and justice in the criminal justice system. So, Jovi added, the principle of free and impartial justice applies to all judicial processes, that is, research, investigation, prosecution, trial, to the pronouncement and implementation of court decisions. If the supervisory council as a non-structural institution is authorized to issue written approval for wiretapping and seizure carried out by KPK investigators, it could potentially to hamper the entire judicial process. 

Legal Standing

Justice Aswanto advised that the Petitioners pay more attention to the legal standing of all 12 Petitioners. He noted that only 4 were present, while others only submitted written power of attorney. “It seems that the Petitioners were not sincere in filing the petition. If they cannot be present [at Court], they could [appoint] a [legal] representative or if they are [live] far from Jakarta they could carry out a video conference after notifying the Court,” he said.

Justice Aswanto also stated that the Petitioners had not elaborated the correlation between the norms and the Petitioners’ legal standing, so that the Court could not see their potential losses. He advised that they elaborate the subject of the petition, “So that the Court can see the constitutional losses if the a quo norm is made a basic norm by the KPK commissioners to carry out their main duties and functions,” he explained.

Justice Wahiduddin highlighted the unclear petitum and petition subjects, especially in relation to the articles petitioned for review. “The Petitioners must be careful and able to simplify this petition with an emphasis, solid but straightforward,” he said.

Before concluding the session, Justice Manahan reminded the Petitioners to revise the petition and submit the revision no later than Monday, December 16, 2019 at 14:30 WIB to the Registrar\'s Office of the Constitutional Court. (Sri Pujianti/NRA)

Translated by: Yuniar Widiastuti

---