PAN Agrees On The Constitutional Court's Decision To Ban Political Party Management From Acting Attorney General

The Attorney General's Office Building (AGO). (AGO.id)

JAKARTA - The National Mandate Party (PAN) respects the decision of the Constitutional Court (MK) which prohibits political party officials (parpol) from serving as Attorney General. PAN agreed that if the attorney general is bound by the party, it will have the potential to abuse authority. "It could also be to protect or find fault with policy makers who incidentally have many elements of political parties," said the chairman of the PAN faction of the DPR RI, Saleh Partaonan Daulay, in His statement to reporters, Wednesday, March 6. According to the chairman of the PAN DPP, the consideration of the panel of judges is very appropriate and reasonable regarding the position of the Attorney General as an independent authority in filing prosecutions. Moreover, said Saleh, the Attorney General is a very strategic position. So that the figure of the Attorney General must be truly independent. "The Attorney General's position is different from the ministerial position. If the minister, his position is purely as an assistant to the president. Meanwhile, the Attorney General is a high official who "It must be truly independent," he explained. Therefore, Saleh added, the Attorney General should not be bound by any interests outside the prosecutor's office. Especially with political interests. "That is why the Attorney General also handles cases of violations of the law in ministries/agencies, even though they are assistants to the president," he concluded. Since the establishment of August 12, 1945 until now, the position of Attorney General who is currently led by Sanitiar Burhanuddin is the 24th Attorney General. Attorney General's position from The party management had drawn pros and cons since the President of the Republic of Indonesia Joko Widodo appointed Muhammad Prasetyo, who is a cadre of the NasDem Party. The position of Attorney General from among political parties was held by Baharuddin Lopa for the period 6 June 2001 to 3 July 2001 from the Golkar Party, then Marzuki Darusman for the period 29 October 1999 to 1 June 2001 was a career prosecutor from the United Development Party (PPP). The Constitutional Court's decision is contained in the decision number 6/PUU-XXII/2024. This is a lawsuit by the prosecutor's attack named Jovi Andrea Bachtiar, who sued the Prosecutor's Law. In the preliminary trial (1/2), the applicant stated that Article 20 of the Prosecutor's Law contradicts Article 1 paragraph (3), Article 2 paragraph (1), and Article 27 paragraph (1) of the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia. In the lawsuit, the applicant stated that the active involvement of law enforcers in political pragmatism moderately or concurrently as members of politics is considered to damage the independence of the prosecutor's office in an unconstitutional manner, especially in eradication of criminal acts of corruption. Attorney General who has involvement with political parties is very likely to have a political contract or get pressure from his political colleagues. Moreover, currently there is no mechanism for checks and balances in the form of a fit and proper test on the appointment and dismissal of the Attorney General.

The Attorney General could have been dismissed from his position if he was deemed disobedient to his political colleagues. For this reason, in his petitum, the petitioner asked the Court to add a "g." Not currently registered as a member of a political party or at least 5 years out of membership of a political party, either dismissed or resigning" in Article 20 of the Prosecutor's Law