In Search of Guards of the Constitution

· 3 minutes read

The House of Representatives (DPR) is selecting two Constitutional Court (MK) justices to replace another two, whose terms in office are about to end.

The terms of justices Wahiduddin Adams and Aswanto end on March 21, 2019. Both have registered their candidacy for justice positions – which would allow them to remain at the Constitutional Court –along with seven other candidates.

The selection of candidates for constitutional justices has not received much attention, because the public is focused on the presidential election. However, Constitutional Court justices also play a central role in this, because they are the ones holding the authority to settle possible election disputes. Constitutional judges are selected by the Supreme Court, the president and the DPR. The current selection is the one being carried out by the DPR.

Because it is related to the presidential election, the selection of constitutional justices through the DPR is of strategic importance. Trade-offs in political interests in the context of the presidential election may occur. The DPR is widely open to attempts of political lobbying by the prospective constitutional justices. Therefore, the selection process at the DPR must be transparent.

The public does not want the DPR\'s selection, which involves a panel of experts, namely former MK deputy chief justice Harjono, Gadjah Mada University criminal law professor Eddy OS Hiariej and former MK justice Maruarar Siahaan, to be simply a formality, which would render it susceptible to political compromise and power-broking at the expense of aspects like integrity and understanding of constitutional issues.

Constitutional justices have a high position as statesmen upholding the Constitution. No other public officials are elevated to so high a social status as those mastering the Constitution. Their high position could see them nullify laws, dissolve political parties and adjudicate disputes over the respective authority of state institutions. Their selection, therefore, must not be based on political compromises.

The DPR must be aware of the disarray following the Corruption Eradication Commission’s (KPK) arrest of erstwhile MK chief justice Akil Mochtar, a justice selected by the DPR. At the time, public trust in the Constitutional Court dropped to a low and was difficult to restore. The Constitutional Court’s decisions are final and binding. The Constitutional Court must be a resolver of constitutional cases. However, we have seen recently that Constitutional Court rulings can be reinterpreted, as in the case of a material test about the nomination of DPR members by political parties. Even though Constitutional Court rulings are final and binding, cases can still be tested at the State Administrative Court, which could erode the authority of the Constitutional Court.

Based on these considerations, we hope the DPR will be careful in selecting the constitutional justices. The candidates’ commitment to the ideology of Pancasila, adherence to the law including mandatory reporting of wealth, understanding of the Constitution and perfect integrity, and as far as possible being able to represent a pluralistic society, should be the guideline for the DPR. The digital track records of the candidates provide an easy way to find information about their view

Editor:

kompascetak