MKMK Explains The Validity Of Suhartoyo's Status As Chief Justice Of The Constitutional Court In Lieu Of Anwar Usman

JAKARTA - The Honorary Council of the Constitutional Court (MKMK) emphasized the validity of Suhartoyo's status as Chief Justice of the Constitutional Court, responding to issues that questioned the mechanism for appointment after disputes at the Jakarta State Administrative Court (PTUN).

Chairman of the MKMK I Dewa Gede Palguna stated that after observing the issue, the MKMK did not find any violations of the code of ethics and behavior of the constitutional judge, Sapta Karsa Hutama, regarding the appointment of the helm of the Constitutional Court.

"There is no legal reason to doubt the validity of Suhartoyo's status as Chairman of the Constitutional Court for the term of 2023-2028," Palguna said at a press conference at the Constitutional Court Building, Jakarta, Thursday, which was confiscated by Antara.

He said that as the guardian of honor and dignity of the Court, MKMK views it as important to take a stand and action on the news on social media and mass media who question whether or not Suhartoyo's position as chairman of the Constitutional Court is valid.

MKMK found that the basis used as an argument in the news was the Administrative Court Decision Number 604/G/2023/PTUN.JKT, which was the decision on the lawsuit filed by Anwar Usman, the previous Chief Justice of the Constitutional Court which was removed by the MKMK for ethical violations.

In this case, Anwar Usman questioned the Constitutional Court Decree Number 17 of 2023, November 9, 2023, regarding the Appointment of the Chief Justice of the Constitutional Court for the Term of Office 2023-2028.

The decree is the basis for Suhartoyo's appointment as Chief Justice of the Constitutional Court as a result of a follow-up to the order of the Constitutional Court Decision Number 2/MKMK/L/11/2023 which dismissed Anwar Usman.

Regarding the issue that developed, MKMK assessed that there were efforts that were deliberately made to mislead the reasoning channel contained in the Administrative Court's decision by releasing the verdict with legal considerations.

"So that the position of Chief Justice of the Constitutional Court for the 2023-2028 term which is currently held by Suhartoyo becomes as if it is invalid," said Palguna.

He explained that the intentional attempt to mislead was evident from the tendency of the narrative which only quoted the second point in the verdict without linking it to all other amar and the context of legal considerations.

The second point of the Administrative Court's decision reads "Declaring the Decree of the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Indonesia Number: 17 of 2023, dated November 9, 2023 concerning the Appointment of Dr. Suhartoyo, SH, MH as Chairman of the Constitutional Court for the Term of Office 2023-2028."

In fact, in the third item of the verdict, it is stated that "Require the Defendant to revoke the Decree of the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Indonesia Number: 17 of 2023, dated November 9, 2023 concerning the Appointment of Dr. Suhartoyo, SH, MH as Chairman of the Constitutional Court for the Term of Office 2023-2028."

Palguna explained that if it was related to the context of legal considerations, the Administrative Court had actually stated that because the Decree of the Constitutional Court Number 17/2023 was declared revoked, the issuance of a decree for the appointment of the Chief Justice of the Constitutional Court on behalf of Suhartoyo, which was correct, had to be carried out by the defendant, in this case, the Chief Justice of the Constitutional Court.

The legal consideration, according to Palguna, also dismissed the assumption that the election of the chairman of the Constitutional Court had to be carried out again after the Administrative Court decision was pronounced on August 13, 2024.

"The TUN's decision did not say so (there must be a re-election). The TUN's decision said it was true that the election was carried out," he said after the press conference.

He also explained that basically, the PTUN canceled the Constitutional Court Decree Number 17/2023 regarding Suhartoyo's appointment as the new Chief Justice of the Constitutional Court because when the decree was issued, the Constitutional Court had not yet issued a decree to dismiss Anwar Usman.

"Only the one who canceled it, the one who canceled Mr. Anwar's appointment had not been mentioned (in the decree). That's why it was corrected," he said.

The Chief Justice of the Constitutional Court, added Palguna, has followed up on the Administrative Court's decision by issuing the Indonesian Constitutional Court Decree Number 8 of 2024 which contains improvements to previous mistakes, as ordered by the Administrative Court's decision.

"Based on all the descriptions above, it has been proven that the Decree of the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Indonesia Number 8 of 2024 is a follow-up to the order of the Administrative Court Decision Number 604/G/2023/PTUN.JKT so that it is not true that the opinion stating that through this decision Suhartoyo appointed himself," he said.