The Invisible Constitution in Comparative Perspective



Download 4,63 Mb.
Pdf ko'rish
bet197/366
Sana18.08.2021
Hajmi4,63 Mb.
#150519
1   ...   193   194   195   196   197   198   199   200   ...   366
Bog'liq
The Invisible Constitution in Comparative Perspective by Rosalind Dixon (editor), Adrienne Stone (editor) (z-lib.org)

The Indonesian Constitutional Court 

307


trial, they would be dismissed under Article 32(1)(c) of Law No 30 of 2002 on 

the Anti-corruption Commission, which states:

Anti-corruption Commission leaders are to leave their position or be removed 

from their positions if they become a defendant (terdakwa) in a criminal case.

One of their arguments was that the Constitution gave citizens the right to be 

presumed innocent until proven guilty, despite the Constitution not expressly 

stating this presumption. Article 32(1)(c) breached that right, they said.

The Court affirmed that due process of law is a fundamental constitutional 

guarantee. It requires that all legal processes are fair: people must be informed 

of legal processes against them and must have the right to be heard before 

their rights, freedoms or property are taken away.

26

 In particular, the Court 



argued, due process of law and the presumption of innocence are primary 

principles of Indonesia’s democratic Negara Hukum. It agreed that Article 

32(1)(c) contravened the presumption of innocence because it imposed a 

sanction without trial. As the applicants had argued, they could be dismissed 

before being found guilty of an offence – indeed, even if they were never 

found guilty of an offence.

10.3. Criticisms

In these cases, the Court has provided scant reasoning to support its decisions. 

Most significantly, the Court has not explained the ‘version’ of the rule of law 

it has adopted or applied in these cases. This is highly problematic because, 

as we will see, the ‘rule of law’ (or Negara Hukum in the Indonesian context) 

is a concept that has been misused as a legitimising tool for decades to sustain 

authoritarianism.

This failure to adequately explain has not been recognised as a significant 

shortcoming by Indonesian lawyers and politicians who, as mentioned, have 

focused their critiques on the particular outcomes of these cases. This is partly 

because Indonesian judicial decisions have not traditionally provided detailed 

reasoning. Indonesia’s legal system follows the civil law tradition. Under that 

tradition, many courts produce short decisions, leaving much of the reasoning 

and contextualisation of decisions to other actors, such as legal academics, 

and there is generally no formal system of precedent.

27

26 



Constitutional Court Decision 6-13-20/PUU-VIII/2010, para 3.18.

27 


Mitchell Lasser, ‘Anticipating Three Models of Judicial Control, Debate and Legitimacy: The 

European Court of Justice, the Cour de Cassation and the United States Supreme Court’, 

Jean Mooet Working Paper 1/03.



308 

Simon Butt

However, the unique status that Constitutional Court decisions have in 

the Indonesian system – legally, politically and historically – increases the 

transparency and accountability threshold the Court must reach, beyond 

those of Indonesia’s other courts. The Court’s roles – as adjudicator of the 

Constitution and its meaning, by which the Court can displace the deci-

sions of a democratically elected legislature and as arbiter of important mat-

ters of state – encumber it with a significant ‘explanatory burden’.

28

 Other 


Indonesian courts can point out that their decisions do not formally create  

law, and argue that accountability and transparency mechanisms are, there-

fore, less critical for them because their decisions affect only the parties. By 

contrast, the Court has no such ‘defence’ at its disposal and, indeed, the 

Court’s identification and application of unexpressed constitutional rights 

appears to further increase its ‘burden’.

Another reason why the Court must explain its reasoning in more detail 

is the widespread presence of judicial impropriety. Most Indonesian courts 

are notorious for corruption.

29

 The more detailed and convincing the reason-



ing, the less likely are suspicions that ‘something else’ is behind the Court’s 

decision-making. While the Constitutional Court is almost certainly much 

cleaner than most other Indonesian courts, opportunities for graft abound, as 

the Akil Mochtar conviction demonstrates.




Download 4,63 Mb.

Do'stlaringiz bilan baham:
1   ...   193   194   195   196   197   198   199   200   ...   366




Ma'lumotlar bazasi mualliflik huquqi bilan himoyalangan ©hozir.org 2024
ma'muriyatiga murojaat qiling

kiriting | ro'yxatdan o'tish
    Bosh sahifa
юртда тантана
Боғда битган
Бугун юртда
Эшитганлар жилманглар
Эшитмадим деманглар
битган бодомлар
Yangiariq tumani
qitish marakazi
Raqamli texnologiyalar
ilishida muhokamadan
tasdiqqa tavsiya
tavsiya etilgan
iqtisodiyot kafedrasi
steiermarkischen landesregierung
asarlaringizni yuboring
o'zingizning asarlaringizni
Iltimos faqat
faqat o'zingizning
steierm rkischen
landesregierung fachabteilung
rkischen landesregierung
hamshira loyihasi
loyihasi mavsum
faolyatining oqibatlari
asosiy adabiyotlar
fakulteti ahborot
ahborot havfsizligi
havfsizligi kafedrasi
fanidan bo’yicha
fakulteti iqtisodiyot
boshqaruv fakulteti
chiqarishda boshqaruv
ishlab chiqarishda
iqtisodiyot fakultet
multiservis tarmoqlari
fanidan asosiy
Uzbek fanidan
mavzulari potok
asosidagi multiservis
'aliyyil a'ziym
billahil 'aliyyil
illaa billahil
quvvata illaa
falah' deganida
Kompyuter savodxonligi
bo’yicha mustaqil
'alal falah'
Hayya 'alal
'alas soloh
Hayya 'alas
mavsum boyicha


yuklab olish