CHAIRMAN of the Judicial Commission (KY) Amzulian Rifai held a meeting with Attorney General Sanitiar Burhanuddin at the Indonesian Attorney General’s Complex, Jakarta, Tuesday (12/11). The meeting took place in the middle of the investigation into a case of alleged bribery and/or gratification which involved three judges at the Surabaya District Court (PN) as suspects in connection with the murder case committed by Ronald Tannur.
After meeting Burhanuddin, Amzulian emphasized that his party’s authority could only investigate ethical violations by members of the judiciary. During this meeting, he said that often investigations carried out by KY found criminal elements. However, Amzulian admitted that his party could not investigate this matter.
“Sometimes during an examination of the ethical area, there are actually things that we believe are criminal in nature. But, when we feel that it is criminal, our authority does not extend to that,” he explained.
Therefore, the meeting with the Attorney General is a moment for the KY to mitigate if it finds suspected criminal acts when examining individual judges. According to Amzulian, Burhanuddin has expressed his willingness to follow up on the results of the KY examination at a later date.
“We will convey follow-up if the results of the examination are criminal. The Attorney General is pleased to follow up later if there are criminal matters,” said Amzulian.
It is known that JAM-Pidsus investigators have named six people as suspects in cases of alleged bribery and/or gratification related to case management, including three Surabaya District Court judges, namely Erintuah Damanik, Mangapul, and Heru Hanindyo.
The other three suspects are former Head of the Legal and Judicial Training Agency of the Supreme Court (MA) Zarof Ricar, Ronald’s lawyer named Lisa Rachmat, and Meirizka Widjaja as Ronald’s mother.
Erintuah, Mangapul, and Heru handed down a verdict of acquittal against Ronald at the first instance court. Meanwhile, at the cassation hearing, Ronald’s case was tried by Supreme Court justices Soesilo, Ainal Mardhiah, and Sutarjo.
Separately, Burhanuddin emphasized that his party would follow up on the report submitted by KY. If the results of the KY’s examination of individual judges are deemed accurate, investigators, continued the Attorney General, will investigate them.
He also said that he would not feel uncomfortable if he investigated a case involving a supreme judge at the Supreme Court. (P-5)
#Meeting #Attorney #General #Chair #Mitigation #Criminal #Findings #Judges
How does the collaboration between the KY and the Attorney General contribute to accountability within the judiciary?
## Bridging the Gap: KY and the Attorney General
**Host:** Welcome back to the show. Today we’re discussing the recent meeting between the Chairman of the Judicial Commission, Amzulian Rifai, and Attorney General Sanitiar Burhanuddin. Joining us to shed light on this important development is legal analyst, [Guest Name].
**Guest:** Thanks for having me.
**Host:** Mr./Ms. [Guest Name], during the meeting, the KY Chairman stated that while they often uncover potential criminal activity during their ethical investigations, they lack the authority to investigate these crimes. Can you elaborate on this?
**Guest:** Certainly. The KY has a specific mandate: to investigate ethical violations by judges. Think of it like a watchdog ensuring judges adhere to a code of conduct. However, when their investigations reveal potential criminal activity – like bribery or corruption – they are not equipped to handle it. That’s where the Attorney General and the public prosecutors come in.
**Host:** So, it seems like there’s a clear distinction between ethical breaches and criminal offenses within the judiciary.
**Guest:** Precisely. The KY’s role is to address ethical lapses, which may lead to disciplinary actions against judges. Criminal offenses, on the other hand, require a separate investigation by law enforcement agencies, ultimately leading to potential prosecution in a court of law.
**Host:** This meeting appears to be a step towards better coordination between these two entities. What are your thoughts on the significance of this collaboration?
**Guest:** This collaboration is crucial. It ensures that potential criminal activity within the judiciary doesn’t slip through the cracks. By sharing information and working together, the KY and the Attorney General can ensure a more comprehensive and effective system of accountability for judges. This ultimately strengthens public trust in the judicial system.
**Host:** Thank you so much for your insights, [Guest Name]. This was a very informative discussion.
**(End segment)**
