Asked about the rejection of Adies Kadir's material, this is the response of the MKMK.

Chairman of the Constitutional Court Honorary Assembly I Dewa Gede Palguna (center) with two members of the MKMK, Yuliandri (left) and Ridwan Mansyur who is also a constitutional judge (right), answer questions from reporters after taking the oath of office as members of the MKMK for the 2026 period at the I Building Hall of the Constitutional Court, Jakarta, Wednesday (7/1/2026). (ANTARA/Fath Putra Mulya)

JAKARTA - The Constitutional Court Honor Assembly or MKMK responded to a number of applicants for a test of the law at the Constitutional Court (MK) who rejected Constitutional Judge Adies Kadir for involvement in their case examination.

Chairman of the MKMK I Dewa Gede Palguna said the issue of whether or not Adies Kadir handles a case depends on the existence or absence of potential conflicts of interest in the case.

"The first way is discussed in the RPH (meeting of judges), where it will be determined whether the person concerned has a conflict of interest or not, in the sense that it is certainly felt to be disturbing," he said when contacted from Jakarta, Thursday, quoted by Antara.

The potential for conflicts of interest determines a judge to withdraw from a case that is being examined. In addition to speaking at the RPH, according to him, the judge concerned can take the initiative to resign if he or she judges that there is a potential for conflicts of interest.

However, if a constitutional judge is in doubt that he needs to withdraw or not from a case, Palguna said the judge concerned can consult the MKMK to ask for an opinion.

"That has happened in the past. So if a judge feels hesitant about whether there is a conflict of interest or not, he can ask the Honor Court about it," he said.

He explained that the code of ethics for constitutional judges, Sapta Karsa Hutama, stipulates that judges must resign from examining a case if there is a conflict of interest. However, there are certain exceptions to that rule.

"Unless it results in the failure to meet the quorum for decision-making or the quorum of the plenary session. The quorum that applies according to the MK Law, whether for decision-making or trial, is always nine people, at least seven people with extraordinary reasons," he explained.

"This means that if there are less than seven people, many judges use their right to refuse, which causes the plenary trial to not be carried out and the decision not to be taken. Well, it is allowed according to the code of ethics of judges not to use their right to refuse," added Palguna.

A number of applicants for testing the law at the Constitutional Court have asked that Constitutional Judge Adies Kadir not participate in examining their cases. The applicants conveyed their right to disobey the judge proposed by the Indonesian House of Representatives on the grounds that the trial would be objective.

At least four cases were requested by the applicants that Adies Kadir was not involved, namely cases number 197/PUU-XXIII/2025 and 238/PUU-XXIII/2025 regarding the material test of the TNI Law, 52/PUU-XXIV/2026 regarding the material test of the Sisdiknas Law and the APBN Law which questions the free nutritious meal program (MBG), and 260/PUU-XXIII/2025 regarding the testing of the Military Justice Law.