MKMK Decides Anwar Usman Not To Violate Ethics In The Case Of Experts In The Administrative Court Lawsuit

The Constitutional Court held a verdict hearing on reports of alleged violations of the code of ethics of Constitutional Justice Anwar Usman at the Constitutional Court Building, Jakarta, Thursday (4/7/2024). ANTARA/Nadia Putri Rahmani

JAKARTA - The Honorary Council of the Constitutional Court (MKMK) decided Constitutional Justice Anwar Usman was not proven to have committed alleged violations of the judge's code of ethics.

"The Judge of the Reported Party has not been proven to have violated the Code of Ethics and Conduct of the Constitutional Justice as stated in the principles of appropriateness and decency in the Sapta Karsa Hutama," said Chief Justice of the Constitutional Court I Dewa Gede Palguna when chairing the verdict hearing at the Constitutional Court Building, Jakarta, Thursday, July 4, quoted by Antara.

It is known that Constitutional Justice Anwar Usman was reported by advocate Zico Leonardo Djagardo Simanjuntak on suspicion of ethical violations related to the principles of appropriateness and decency listed in Sapta Karsa Hutama.

Zico as the reporting party assessed that there was an alleged conflict of interest between Anwar Usman and advocate Muhammad Rullyandi.

He said that Rullyandi was an expert in the trial of the case filed by Anwar Usman at the Jakarta Administrative Court, even though Rullyandi was the KPU's attorney in the PHPU Pileg trial handled by Anwar.

In the consideration section read by MKMK member Ridwan Mansyur, MKMK has explicitly stated that the establishment of the Administrative Court does not have the authority to try the Constitutional Court's decision which is the final decision of the ethics institution.

Then, regarding Anwar's legal rights, he said that presenting experts in the trial is the right of every citizen in undergoing a fair legal process.

He said, in his capacity as a constitutional judge, Anwar was indeed required to maintain the integrity and dignity of his position in accordance with the code of ethics principle. However, this does not eliminate his right as a citizen to apply and present experts in the legal process that involves him.

"Thus, the submission of Muhammad Rullyandi as an expert by the Reported Judge through his attorney in his case at the Jakarta Administrative Court is part of the efforts of the Reported Judge to defend his rights as a citizen to obtain expert information in the legal process that involves him," he said.

In another consideration read out by MKMK member Yuliandri, it was stated that the panel had measured Anwar's degree of involvement in choosing and determining the experts presented at the trial at the Administrative Court in order to assess the potential for violations of the code of ethics.

The Constitutional Court has asked for direct information from Anwar Usman and the results are known that the constitutional judge does not know anything and does not know Rullyandi closely.

Anwar stated that Rullyandi's election decision was left entirely to his legal team.

Therefore, in conclusion, the Constitutional Court stated that there was no violation of the Code of Ethics and Conduct of Constitutional Justices regarding the principles of appropriateness and decency in the Sapta Karsa Hutama carried out by Anwar Usman as argued by the reporter.