CHIEF JUSTICE OF SUPREME COURT: NO BARGAINING FOR JUDICIAL INDEPENDENCE

Mataram-PR: Chief Justice of Supreme Court of Republic of Indonesia, Prof. Dr. H.M. Hatta Ali., SH., MH., states that independence is principle and must be uphold in Judge authority implementing, no bargaining for judicial independence. In the judicial history, need long journey to uphold the judicial independence. Accordance Act 4 of 2004, judicial authority in Indonesia was really free from the other country’s intervention. Nowadays, others will never be intervene Indonesia Judicial Independence.

Those statements stated by Chief Justice of Supreme Court of Indonesia in Development of Judicial Technical and Administration for chiefs, vices chief, judges, registrars, and secretaries in District Court and Appellate Court from four judicial area in Bali and Nusa Tenggara Barat Province on Thursday, November 3rd, 2016 in Mataram. The event also attended by leadership of Supreme Court, several honorable judges, and chiefs of appellate court in all over Indonesia.

According to Chief Justice of Supreme Court that the judicial authority was guaranteed by Act 1945. But the real, the act guarantee ignored by the other countries dominations. In Orde Lama, Act 19 of 1964 states that court is revolution equipment which is caused President can involve court affairs (Article 19 of Act 19/1964). That Act offers that court organization, administration and financial under Executive (Department) authority while the technical matter under Supreme Court authority.

“In Orde Baru era, Chief Justice of Supreme Court was equal with ministers. In Act 14 of 1970, the court managed by two institutions, both are Ministry of Law and Supreme Court. “The mind in Supreme Court but financial, promotion and mutation in Ministry of Law of Republic of Indonesia” Said Hatta Ali.

In Reformasi Era constitutional system and court system rearranged. The administration accordance in Provision of People’s Consultative Assembly (MPR) No X/MPR/1998 concerning the specifics of developing reformation in saving and normalization national life as a state policy. According to Provision of MPR court developing by Executive was a way for Executive to intervene court process and kind of negatives practices such as collusion. This is reason why we need to separate the function of judicative and executive firmly.

Law reformation in provision of MPR No X/MPR/1998 followed up by Act 35 of 1999. According to the Act, court organization, financial, and administration must be under Supreme Court authority. Diversion process divided to several ways in 5 years maximally. One roof system completed with existing the Act 4 of 2004 concerning Judicial Authority.

“We waiting for approximately 34 years to realize one roof court.” said Hatta Ali. The positive impact of one roof system can be realized by public directly. The cases finishing can be done faster.

Justice reform program such as disclosure information more effective, human resources developing more effective and measurable for four judicial areas.

Beside Supreme Court can understand the judge quality through Decision controlling in appellate level. “The information can be used to promotion and mutation”. Said Hatta. (azh/RS)