Member of Commission III of the Indonesian House of Representatives, Soedeson Tandra, emphasized that the selection process of Adies Kadir as a Constitutional Court (MK) Judge had been carried out in accordance with the strict mechanism of the state and did not violate the applicable procedures.
This statement was made by Soedeson in response to the steps of the Constitutional and Administrative Law Society (CALS) which reported Adies Kadir to the Constitutional Court Honor Council (MKMK). Soedeson ensured that the entire selection process up to the inauguration of the former Deputy Speaker of the DPR had followed the existing rules.
According to Soedeson, this election refers to Article 24C paragraph 3 of the 1945 Constitution which gives the DPR the authority to propose three candidates for constitutional judges. In addition, the process also refers to Article 20 of the MK Law which regulates the procedures for selection in an objective, accountable, transparent, and open manner.
"The entire process of selecting Adies Kadir as a constitutional judge is in accordance with the provisions of the law," said Soedeson in Jakarta, Sunday, February 8.
Soedeson denied the assumption that the selection was closed or rushed without a clear reason. He explained, Commission III only received information on January 21, 2026 that constitutional judge Inosentius Samsul would get another assignment.
Considering the deadline for filling the position falls on February 3, 2026, Commission III moved quickly by holding a meeting and a public suitability and appropriateness test on January 26, 2026.
"The entire process in Commission III and the Plenary Meeting is broadcast live on TV Parliament so that it can be watched by all Indonesian people," said Soedeson.
In the feasibility test, Adies Kadir conveyed his vision and mission and was approved by acclamation by all factions before being ratified in the plenary meeting. Soedeson emphasized that Adies Kadir had fulfilled the administrative and integrity requirements as stipulated in Article 15 paragraph 1 and 2 of the MK Law.
This selection process also refers to Article 185 of the MD3 Law and Article 26 of the DPR Rules of Procedure regarding administrative research and feasibility tests, which include publication to the public through the media.
Soedeson denied any special treatment in Adies' appointment. He compared this process to the selection of constitutional judges in the DPR line before, such as when choosing Arsul Sani and Guntur Hamzah, which was carried out with a similar method.
Furthermore, Soedeson asked all parties to respect the strict mechanism of the state and the principle of separation of powers. He believes that the MKMK will not exceed its authority by interfering with the internal procedures of other institutions.
He also questioned the substance of the report to the MKMK, considering that the agency's realm is to examine allegations of ethical violations of judges who are in office, while Adies Kadir has just been inaugurated.
"MKMK is like MKD in the DPR. MKD can only handle ethical issues when someone has officially served as a member of the DPR. MKD cannot examine the actions or processes that occurred before the person became a council member," explained Soedeson.
Regarding Adies Kadir's background as a former Golkar Party politician, Soedeson assessed that it was not a problem, citing Mahfud MD and Arsul Sani who also came from political parties before becoming MK judges.
He ensured that Adies Kadir had committed to maintaining independence and would resign from the party and would not handle matters related to his old party.
"Adies Kadir himself has said, his statement is clear, that if there is a Golkar case, he will not handle it," he concluded.
The English, Chinese, Japanese, Arabic, and French versions are automatically generated by the AI. So there may still be inaccuracies in translating, please always see Indonesian as our main language. (system supported by DigitalSiber.id)
