Budget Controlled by the Executive, Judicial Independence Considered Fragile

Expert in Constitutional Law at the University of Muslim Indonesia, Dr. Fahri Bachmid, at the Constitutional Court (MK) RI, Wednesday, January 28, 2026 (MK document)

JAKARTA - Expert in State Law at the University of Muslim Indonesia, Dr. Fahri Bachmid, emphasized that the independence of the judiciary is not enough to be interpreted as the freedom of judges in deciding cases. According to him, judicial independence must be supported by institutional and budgetary independence so that it is truly free from the intervention of other branches of power.

This was conveyed by Fahri when giving testimony as an expert in the trial of the law on Case Number 189/PUU-XXIII/2025 at the Constitutional Court (MK) RI, Wednesday, January 28.

"Independence of the judicial power is not a single concept that stands alone, but an ecosystem built on three main interlocking pillars, namely the independence of judges, institutional independence, and budgetary independence," said Fahri in front of the Constitutional Court.

He emphasized that the three pillars are one unity that cannot be separated. If one of them is weakened, especially the budget aspect, then the constitutional guarantee of judicial independence will lose its material basis.

"If one of the pillars is fragile, especially the budget pillar which is often the most vulnerable point, then the constitutional guarantee of the independent judiciary will lose its material basis," he said.

Fahri highlighted the budgeting mechanism of the Supreme Court (MA) and the Constitutional Court which until now are still in the process of negotiation and approval of the budget implementation document (DIPA) by the Ministry of Finance. According to him, this procedure has the potential to open room for executive interference with the judicial institution.

He assessed that although the judicial budget was listed separately in the State Budget, Indonesia did not have an explicit constitutional guarantee regarding the independence of the judicial power budget. In addition, there is no protection from executive modifications or direct budget submission mechanisms to the DPR.

In his view, control over the budget is identical to control over power.

"Whoever controls the budget pocket, then he is the one who really controls power," said Fahri.

Fiscal dependence, he continued, risks creating conflicts of interest, especially when the government becomes a party to the cases examined by the Constitutional Court and the Supreme Court.

"How can the judicial institution decide on a dispute where the government is one of the parties, while at the same time they have to ask or negotiate its operational budget with the government," he said.

Fahri also touched on the phrase "own budget eyes" in the MA Law and the MK Law which was considered to have degraded in meaning. In practice, the phrase is only understood as an administrative aspect, not full sovereignty over budget management.

"The phrase is now only a nomenclature of accounts in the APBN. Meanwhile, the substance of the budget remains under the control of the ministry under the president," he said.

For comparison, Fahri assessed that the budgeting mechanism of the Financial Audit Agency (BPK) more reflects the independence of state institutions because it can be submitted directly to the DPR. This model, according to him, can become a precedent for the judiciary.

He also criticized Article 7 paragraph (2) letter b of the State Treasury Law which gives the Minister of Finance the authority to approve the DIPA. This provision is considered to have the potential to create an unbalanced power relationship.

Fahri also encouraged the Constitutional Court to provide a conditional interpretation of the norm so that the executive authority is limited to only the technical function of cash management.

"Without autonomous budgetary autonomy and separate from purely executive discretion, the attribute 'independent' in Article 24 paragraph (1) of the 1945 Constitution will only be a normative slogan that loses its functionality," he said.