Ethics Council chairman I Dewa Gede Palguna and members Yuliandri dan Ridwan Mansyur presiding over a hearing, Thursday (4/25/2024). Photo by MKRI/Bayu.

---

JAKARTA (MKRI) — Since Constitutional Justice M. Guntur Hamzah (reported justice) was appointed a constitutional justice, he no longer signed any documents relating to the organization of the Association of Constitutional and Administrative Law Lectures of Indonesia (APHTN-HAN), following Decree No. 01.11/APHTN-HAN/XII/2023 on the amendment to Decree No. 01.01/APHTN-HAN/II/2021 on the term of office of the executives of APHTN-HAN for 2021–2025. As such, pursuant to the propriety and decency principles in the Sapta Karsa Hutama (constitutional justices’ code of ethics and conduct), especially point 11, constitutional justices may participate in social or professional associations insofar as it does not interfere with their duty as constitutional justices.

This statement was part of the Constitutional Court Ethics Council’s (MKMK) legal opinion delivered by member Yuliandri at its ruling hearing on the report by a forum of university students who have concerns over constitutional issues, Forum Mahasiswa Peduli Konstitusi (FORMASI), and a movement by constitutional law activists, Gerakan Aktivis Konstitusi (GAS) in the Constitutional Court’s panel courtroom in its second building on Thursday, April 25, 2024. The hearing was presided over by the Council’s chairman I Dewa Gede Palguna and members Yuliandri and Ridwan Mansyur. In cases No. 06/MKMK/L/04/2024 and No. 07/MKMK/L/04/2024, M. Guntur Hamzah was alleged to have made a breach of code of ethics of constitutional justices.

Therefore, Yuliandri continued, the reported’s involvement in APHTN-HAN, including when he was chairman, was not a violation of the Sapta Karsa Hutama. In addition, he was appointed chairman through the organization’s sixth national meeting in Samarinda, which took place on February 3-4, 2021, since he had been the Constitutional Court’s secretary-general. The appointment was based on Decree No. 01.01/APHTN-HAN/II/2021.

“[The Council] considered that the Complainants’ allegation that the Reported Justice’s position as chairman of APHTN-HAN is in violation of the Sapta Karsa Hutama was groundless,” said Yuliandri at the online hearing.

Also read: University Students, Activists Report Alleged Ethics Breach by Justice

Independence and Communication

In its, legal opinion, delivered by Ridwan Mansyur, the Council asserted that intensive communication with APHTN-HAN’s executives and members is not exclusive to the Reported Justice’s position as the association’s chairman. The association’s executives and members also have intensive communication between themselves.

“Thus, the Complainants’ allegation that the Reported’s position as APHTN-HAN’s chairman could influence his independence in the 2024 presidential election results dispute was groundless. Therefore, the Complainants’ appeal to the Ethics Council that the Reported not be involved in adjudicating the 2024 presidential election, that is, cases No. 1/PHPU.PRES-XXII/2024 and No. 2/PHPU.PRES-XXII/2024, was groundless as well,” Ridwan said.

Also read: Ethics Council Questions FORMASI’s Witnesses on Alleged Ethics Breach

Dissenting Opinion

The Complainants’ allegation of ethics breach due to the Court’s legal opinion for Decisions No. 29, 51, and 55/PUU-XXI/2023 being used in Decision No. 90/PUU-XXI/2023 was also declared groundless by the Council. It asserted that dissenting opinions relating to counter-legal arguments against any substance of a legal opinion for a certain decision are not indicative of any issue. Such varying opinions are essentially a form of independence of the individual constitutional justices and of the judiciary.

As such, the Complainants’ argument against the Reported Justice’s dissenting opinion was deemed unfounded and was not considered for its irrelevance.

“The Reported was not found to have committed any violation of the code of ethics and conduct of constitutional justices in relation to his position as chairman of APHTN-HAN and any potential undue influence to the resolution of the 2024 presidential election results dispute; he was not found to have committed any violation of the code of ethics and conduct of constitutional justices in relation to the legal argument in his dissenting opinion for Decisions No. 29, 51, and 55/PUU-XXI/2023, which was used as a basis for the legal opinion of Decision No. 90/PUU-XXI/2023,” Palguna said delivering the verdict.

Author       : Sri Pujianti
Editor        : Nur R.
Translator  : Yuniar Widiastuti

Disclaimer: The original version of the news is in Indonesian. In case of any differences between the English and the Indonesian versions, the Indonesian version will prevail.

---