CHAIRMAN of the Judicial Commission (KY) Amzulian Rifai held a meeting with Attorney General Sanitiar Burhanuddin at the Indonesian Attorney General’s Complex, Jakarta, Tuesday (12/11). The meeting took place in the middle of the investigation into a case of alleged bribery and/or gratification which involved three judges at the Surabaya District Court (PN) as suspects in connection with the murder case committed by Ronald Tannur.
After meeting Burhanuddin, Amzulian emphasized that his party’s authority could only investigate ethical violations by members of the judiciary. During this meeting, he said that often investigations carried out by KY found criminal elements. However, Amzulian admitted that his party could not investigate this matter.
“Sometimes during an ethical examination, there are actually things that we believe are criminal in nature. But, when we feel that they are criminal, our authority does not extend to that,” he explained.
Therefore, the meeting with the Attorney General is a moment for the KY to mitigate if it finds suspected criminal acts when examining individual judges. According to Amzulian, Burhanuddin has expressed his willingness to follow up on the results of the KY examination at a later date.
“We will convey follow-up if the results of the examination are criminal. The Attorney General is pleased to follow up later if there are criminal matters,” said Amzulian.
It is known that JAM-Pidsus investigators have named six people as suspects in cases of alleged bribery and/or gratification related to case management, including three Surabaya District Court judges, namely Erintuah Damanik, Mangapul, and Heru Hanindyo.
The other three suspects are former Head of the Legal and Judicial Training Agency of the Supreme Court (MA) Zarof Ricar, Ronald’s lawyer named Lisa Rachmat, and Meirizka Widjaja as Ronald’s mother.
Erintuah, Mangapul, and Heru handed down a verdict of acquittal against Ronald at the first instance court. Meanwhile, at the cassation hearing, Ronald’s case was tried by Supreme Court justices Soesilo, Ainal Mardhiah and Sutarjo.
Separately, Burhanuddin emphasized that his party would follow up on the report submitted by KY. If the results of the KY’s examination of individual judges are deemed accurate, investigators, continued the Attorney General, will investigate them.
He also said that he would not feel uncomfortable if he investigated a case involving a supreme judge at the Supreme Court. (P-5)
#Meeting #Attorney #General #Chair #Mitigation #Criminal #Findings #Judges
What was the primary goal of the meeting between the Judicial Commission Chairman and the Attorney General, and what mechanism emerged from this collaboration to address accountability issues?
## Intriguing Insight into Judicial Oversight in Indonesia
**Introduction:**
Welcome back to the program. Today, we’re delving into the fascinating world of judicial oversight in Indonesia, following a recent meeting between the Chairman of the Judicial Commission, Amzulian Rifai, and the Attorney General, Sanitiar Burhanuddin. To help us unpack the complexities of this issue, we have with us legal expert and analyst, Dr. Maya Sari.
**Welcome, Dr. Sari.**
**Dr. Sari:** Thank you for having me.
**Host:**
Let’s get right into it. As we understand it, this meeting stems from ongoing investigations into alleged bribery and gratification involving three judges at the Surabaya District Court. Can you shed light on the specific concerns raised by the Judicial Commission Chairman?
**Dr. Sari:**
Absolutely. Mr. Rifai highlighted a crucial limitation of the Judicial Commission’s authority. While they’re empowered to investigate ethical violations within the judiciary, they lack the mandate to pursue criminal charges. This presents a significant challenge when their investigations uncover potential criminal activity, as they recently have in this case involving the Surabaya judges.
**Host:**
That’s quite a complex situation. What was the purpose, then, of this meeting between the Judicial Commission and the Attorney General?
**Dr. Sari:**
Essentially, it was a critical step towards collaboration and accountability. The meeting aimed to establish a mechanism for “mitigation.”
In simpler terms, if the Judicial Commission uncovers evidence suggesting criminal acts during their ethical investigations, they now have a channel to pass this information on to the Attorney General’s office for further scrutiny and potential prosecution.
**Host:**
This sounds like a positive development towards ensuring that judges are held accountable for their actions, both ethically and legally.
**Dr. Sari:**
Indeed. It’s a step in the right direction. This collaborative approach recognizes the overlapping jurisdictions involved and aims to prevent any potential loopholes that might allow individuals to avoid consequences for their actions simply due to jurisdictional ambiguity.
Let me add that Mr. Rifai’s statement underscores the need for continued review of the legal framework surrounding judicial oversight. Whether there’s a necessity to expand the Judicial Commission’s powers or to create more robust
mechanisms for inter-agency cooperation, this situation highlights the complexities and challenges inherent in maintaining a just and transparent judicial system.
**Host:**
Thank you, Dr. Sari. This is certainly a story we’ll continue to follow closely. Thanks for providing us with such insightful analysis.
**Dr. Sari:**
My pleasure. Thanks for having me.
