TEMPO.CO, Jakarta - The Corruption Eradication Commission’s (KPK) recent arrest of Constitutional Court’s chief justice, Akil Mochtar, along with the seizure of Rp3 billion in cash as evidence, have completed the nation’s crumbling law enforcement system. If the public has been sick of seeing the process of “trade” within the law committed by attorneys, judges, policemen and lawmakers, the arrest of Akil could be the gong to the destruction of behavior of our law enforcers.
Akil is the tarnished face of our law. Since the process of his appointment, the former Golkar Party politician has seized the public spotlight. Last April, opinions in Tempo magazine and the editorial of Koran Tempo newspaper also raised this issue. Some organizations, including the Indonesia Corruption Watch (ICW), are questioning his track record. When he was the deputy chair of the House of Representatives’ Commission overseeing legal affairs, he was suspected of taking kickbacks for the expansion of West Kalimantan. He was accused of accepting Rp680 million in bribes from the Sintang district treasury, yet this accusation just vanished into thin air.
The public cannot understand why the House did not take this impaired track record into consideration when they appointed Akil as chief justice of the Constitutional Court. Last April, his term was instead extended and he was promoted to chief justice. The objectivity of Senayan lawmakers at that time should also be questioned.
Now, it’s too late. The credibility of the Constitutional Court has been laid on the line due to the House’s random selection of its leader—despite the fact that constitutional justices have to make crucial verdicts, such as solving disputes over regional heads, dissolving political parties, to the impeachment of president and vice president.
Actually, graft cases involving Akil and the Constitutional Court have long been suspected. Three years ago, Refly Harun, an attorney, revealed that Simalungun Regent Jopinus Ramli Saragih once admitted he was asked to give Rp1 billion to Akil related to the dispute over the election of the Simalungun regional head, which was handled by the Constitutional Court. A similar case involved another constitutional justice, Arsyad Sanusi, who was accused of accepting a bribe from Dirwan Makhdmud, a South Bengkulu regent candidate. Unfortunately, the court’s chief justice at that time, Mahfud Md., did not take these allegations seriously and the case was never followed through.
The aroma of graft surrounding Akil was apparently sniffed again. This time, the anti-graft commission suspected Akil of fixing the winners linked to the regional disputes of the Gunung Mas regency in Central Kalimantan and another one in Lebak regency, Banten. The KPK should not have stopped at just Akil. It is suspected that Akil were having cohorts as, according to Law No. 24/ 2003, the Constitutional Court’s verdict is collegial.
Akil’s arrest should also be a sour turn for the House, the Supreme Court, and the government. These three high-ranking state institutions must be more selective in nominating their representatives at the Constitutional Court. The justice candidates must be truly competent, have good track records, and neutral. So far, the loose requirements are resulting in the appointment of a tarnished justice. The public will never want to see that a court with such tremendous powers be filled with people with dubious integrity and independence . (*)
