Integrity Behind The Judge's Decision Upon KPU Regulation

Recently, Indonesian Supreme Court, through its Judges, consisting; Irfan Fachrudin, Yodi Martono and Supandi has answered Jumanto's Plea regarding the restriction made by General Election Commision (KPU) in order to restrict ex-convicted corruption, drug dealing and sexual criminals who enroll themselves onto the Parliament.

The restriction stipulates within General Election Commission Regulation number 20 / 2018 article 4 paragraph 3 and article 11 paragraph  1 (d), it states that political parties shall not propose any candidate who already being accused in corruption, sexual abuse, and drug dealing criminal. 

The Supreme Court considers that article 4 paragraph 3  General Election Commission Regulation could be and already obstruct the law above it, which is Regulation number 7 / 2017. 

The regulation itself already made a pathway for ex-criminal who want to enroll themselves in Parliament, it generally says that despite their current status as an ex-criminal, as long as they made a declaration about their previous status and the public were concerned about it, also if they were qualified enough, then the General Election Commission should accept that ex-corruptor as a candidate of Parliament.

However, after the news had spread through the media stream. The public were upset about the decision and it remarkably gains their utmost attention. 

After all, recently through this 2018, there were huge amount of grand corruption cases which tarnished Indonesian democracy being unfold by KPK, including the corruption of ; Governor of Jambi, which commonly known as a top public figure, 42 members of Malang Regional House of Representative along with its Mayor, and last but not least the chairman of Indonesia's House of Representative.

Even though most of the public were upset about the judge decision, there were also some of them who appreciate the decision. If we see through the judges reasoning then we could see that there are 4 points of reasons why that restriction should be revoked.

The Supremacy of Law in Indonesia

According to article 1 number 3 Indonesia constitution. it clearly states that "Indonesia is a law state". Which mean our founding fathers wanted to build this country as a rechstaat. 

The concept of rechstaat are the enactment of separation of power and to respect, to protect and to fulfill citizen constitutional and human right. 

Therefore article 28D paragraph 3 of constitution also states that every citizen has the equal right to choose and to be choosen in political democracy, which means the country will protect those right so there should be none of any regulation made by legislative attempt or an administrative attempt would restrict any of it

Judge's Discretion Power

Although our constitute would restrict any of above attempt to restrict one's right of political and democracy participation. In order to maintain justice there are other ways allowed by the constitution to do the peculiar attempt, which is through the judicial power.

Article 24 paragraph 1 constitution states that the judicial power is an independent power to maintain the law and justice. Therefore the derivation of those power could be found in article 18  paragraph 1 (d), with it the judge by the law held a capability to take one's political and democracy rights away for a specific period of time. Some of the decision could be found in Sultan Nur Alam, Ridwan Mukti and Irman Gusman cases.

Penal Law  as an Ultimum Remedium

The Judges had also deliberately thoughts of the spirit of the law itself. The judges believe that any of the criminal who already run their sentences would become an innocent well being. 

Through the process of law they have repent on what they have done and there should be no any other penalties beside the court sentence. So the people who had already finished their sentence should live like how a normal person live without any kind of discrimination. Therefore the restriction made by KPU beside it obstruct the law above it, it also seems had tarnished the spirit of the itself.

The Death Penalties awaits

Last thing according the writters opinion, there is a law enactment in the future which is a worth to wait and worth to try, the death penalties for a corruptor. 

According to article 2 paragaph 2 Regulation number 31 / 1999 states that the death penalty would lay upon to the accused if corruption is held in a specific matters. Thus, in the explanation of the article, defined that one of the specific matters is "if the accused had occurs a repeated corruption".Therefore there would be a great chances that a corruptor could have their life ended by the proper process of the law.