Jakarta – A graft watchdog warned on Tuesday that the country's corruption court could face credibility issues, as at least 84 judges in 14 courts were found to be problematic.
In a report compiled by Indonesian Corruption Watch (ICW) in collaboration with 14 partners in 14 provinces, the watchdog found that in the first half of 2012, 70 percent of judges had issues in three areas: administration; quality; and integrity. "The data shows that we have serious issues with our judges, not only with ad hoc judges, but also professional ones," Donal Fariz of the ICW said on Tuesday.
In the report, the ICW recorded that most of the ad hoc judges had not submitted their wealth with the state officials wealth disclosure forms (LHKPN). Also, a majority of professional judges had not renewed their reports. ICW found a case in which the wealth of one professional judge increased ten times in eight years, while another judge was living large, as indicated by his penchant for luxury cars and golf.
One of the most worrying trends among the judges was their habit of acquitting graft defendants. In total, the country's corruption courts have acquitted 71 defendants since first being established in 2010. Surabaya topped the record with 26 acquittals, followed by Samarinda with 15 acquittals, Padang and Semarang ad hoc court with seven acquittals each and Bandung with five acquittals. One of the judges in Surabaya released five defendants in 2011 alone.
Donal said that judges who acquitted defendants or gave sentence reductions are those who have integrity problems. Data from ICW showed some judges came from various backgrounds, such as consultancy or banking, and that they lack the basic knowledge in law and court procedures. "Some judges don't have enough skills because they don't have law school or a legal background," he said.
The ICW also found that several judges showed indications that they could be involved in corruption themselves. At least 10 judges were alleged to have received bribes from graft defendants, the ICW report says. Collusion between judges and defendants usually takes place when the two sides negotiate sentences or choose "favorite" judges.
Most graft defendants only received between two to four years, way below the maximum 20-year jail term stipulated in the 2001 Corruption Law. "Those who choose their "favorite" judges usually deal with the heads of the ad hoc courts as they decide on the composition of judges," he said.
Judicial Commission spokesman Asep Rahmat Fajar said that the commission would use the ICW report as a basis for its close inspection of several corruption courts. "We will follow-up on the report, especially on the issue of integrity of the judges, and we will improve the skills of the judges with training so that the their quality is improved," he said.
Asep also said that that complaints against judges to the commission mostly concerned the violation of the code of conduct.
Meanwhile, KPK spokesman Johan Budi said that the Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK) would use the ICW report to help its own probe into corruption court judges. "We have received it and we will use it, but not as a complaint. This is only a survey result," he said. (cor)