(20/5/2023) | Faculty of Law, 51动漫 (FH UNAIR), in collaboration with the East Java Regional Judicial Commission, held a “Civil Society and Student Training for Court Monitoring with the Judicial Commission” on Tuesday (16/5/2023) in the PBL Room, Building A FH UNAIR. Judicial monitoring is related to the dignity of the judiciary in resolving disputes. The objectives of judicial monitoring include monitoring of judicial agency infrastructure, monitoring of case data, monitoring of court services, monitoring of human resources, and profiling of judges.
The concept of judicial monitoring aims to prevent abuse of power and guarantee the right to a fair trial (fair trial). According to the Asia Foundation, ethics and standards in judicial monitoring apply at least five elements, namely understanding of the judicial process and monitoring objectives, neutral and objective, honest and accurate, open and transparent, and non-intervention in the judicial process.
The speaker who attended the training activity, Dizar Al Farizi, S.H., M.H., was a representative from the Judicial Commission of the Republic of Indonesia for the East Java Region. He delivered material regarding the qualifications and quantification of the evaluation of the enforcement of the Code of Ethics and the Code of Conduct for Judges (KEPPH). Based on Article 24B paragraph (1) of the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia (1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia), the Judicial Commission is an independent body that has the authority to propose the appointment of Supreme Court Justices and has other powers to safeguard and uphold honor, integrity, and judge behavior. The powers and duties of the Judicial Commission are further regulated in Law Number 18 of 2011.
“According to Article 20 of Law Number 18 of 2011, the Judicial Commission has to monitor and supervise the behavior of judges; receive reports from the public regarding violations of KEPPH; carry out verification, clarification, and investigation of reports of suspected violations of KEPPH in private; decide whether the report on alleged violations of KEEPH is true or not; as well as taking legal steps and/or other steps against individuals, groups of people, or legal entities that undermine the honor and dignity of judges,” explained Dizar.
The provisions of Article 20 of Law Number 18 of 2011 emphasize that civil society can report violations against KEPPH to the Judicial Commission. The Judicial Commission will receive the report, then verify and investigate. After that, the Judicial Commission will decide to take legal and non-legal steps if it is proven true that there has been a violation of KEPPH.
“So far, there have been many reports from the public. However, this reporting mechanism also has drawbacks. The identity of the reporter who was not clear and the reporter who only conveyed the chronology of the case without mentioning the alleged KEPPH violations committed by the judge were factors why the reporting mechanism from the public was not very effective. In addition, reporters often do not explain in detail the alleged KEPPH violations committed by judges, and the supporting evidence is very minimal,” said Dizar.
Even so, the Judicial Commission continues to receive and process all incoming public reports. As of March 2023, there have been 566 incoming reports, with details of 512 reports having been verified and 54 reports still in the verification process. The most reported types of cases were civil cases, with 292 reports. So far, 14 judges have been reported by the public and have been given sanctions, with details of nine unprofessional judges, two judges involved in gratuities, one judge involved in an affair, one judge communicated outside the court with litigants, and one judge did not give access to the reporter to meet his biological child.
