Examined By MKMK, Constitutional Justice Suhartoyo: Confirmed Just Finish It Quickly

Constitutional Court Judge Suhartoyo/ANTARA/Sanya Dinda)

JAKARTA - Constitutional Court (MK) Judge Suhartoyo was questioned by the Constitutional Court Honorary Council (MKMK).

"Just confirmed, confirm the complaint with what I know," Suhartoyo told reporters quoted by ANTARA, Wednesday, November 1.

According to him, he was only questioned for a short time because there were not too many public reports to the Constitutional Court regarding him.

"Just confirmation, because I'm not too, substantially, I'm not, maybe it's seen that there aren't many (reports) so the confirmation will be completed quickly," Suhartoyo said.

Suhartoyo was questioned behind closed doors by three members of the MKMK, namely Jimly Asshiddiqie, Wahiduddin Adams, and Bintan R. Saragih.

On Monday (16/10), the Constitutional Court granted part of Case Number 90/PUU-XXI/2023 which was proposed by an Indonesian citizen (WNI) named Almas Tsaqibbirru from Surakarta, Central Java.

In his petition, Almas requested that the nomination requirements for presidential election participants be changed to a minimum age of 40 years or experienced as regional heads, both at the provincial and district and city levels.

The decision is considered by the public to be full of conflicts of interest. The public suspects that the Constitutional Court judge violated the code of ethics in examining and deciding the case.

Chairman of the Honorary Council of the Constitutional Court (MKMK) Jimly Asshiddiqie said there were ten issues related to the Constitutional Court that had been reported to the Constitutional Court from the trial of the reporter's examination on Tuesday (31/10) to Wednesday (1/11).

One of them, the Constitutional Court judge was reported for not resigning when examining cases related to his family.

The Constitutional Court judge was also reported for speaking in public regarding the substance of the matter in the case being examined.

In addition, the Constitutional Court judge was also reported for revealing dissenting opinions or dissent related to the substance of the matter of the case being examined.