Reforming Ethical Oversight Mechanisms for Constitutional Court Justices in Indonesia

The integrity of the Constitutional Court of Indonesia, as one of the judicial authorities in the post-reform constitutional system, demands not only independence but also ethical accountability of its justices. While Article 24 of the 1945 Constitution and Law No. 48 of 2009 safeguard judicial independence, oversight mechanisms particularly ethical ones remain limited and internally controlled. The abolition of the Constitutional Court Honorary Council of Appeals (Majelis Kehormatan Banding) and the lack of external checks have raised critical questions about due process, institutional legitimacy, and legal certainty in judicial ethical enforcement. This research adopts a normative legal method, utilizing statute, case, and conceptual approaches. Primary legal sources include the 1945 Constitution, Law No. 48 of 2009 on Judicial Powers, Law No. 24 of 2003 and its amendments on the Constitutional Court, and Constitutional Court Regulations (PMK). These are analyzed alongside decisions of the Honorary Council (MKMK), academic literature, and comparative doctrines on judicial accountability and ethics. The findings reveal significant institutional and procedural weaknesses in the current ethical oversight system. The absence of an appeal mechanism against MKMK decisions and the concentration of oversight within the Court itself reduce transparency, weaken checks and balances, and potentially undermine public trust. Although the MKMK is tasked with maintaining judicial ethics, its structural dependency, lack of external participation, and limited procedural safeguards raise concerns about fairness and impartiality in high-stakes disciplinary decisions. This study argues for a comprehensive reconstruction of the ethical oversight f ramework for Constitutional Court justices. Reform is needed to enhance the independence of the MKMK, reestablish a credible appellate body, and institutionalize procedural guarantees in line with the principles of due process of law. Legal reform should also clarify the consequences of ethical violations and establish clearer norms for proportional sanctions. These efforts are essential to restore public confidence and ensure the Court’s legitimacy as the guardian of the Constitution.

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Legal horizons
Published
2025-06-29
DOI
https://doi.org/10.54477/10.54477/lh.25192353.2025.2.pp.86-96
Primary Topic
Judicial and Constitutional Studies
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Reforming Ethical Oversight Mechanisms for Constitutional Court Justices in Indonesia

Legal horizons
Judicial and Constitutional Studies
article

Reforming Ethical Oversight Mechanisms for Constitutional Court Justices in Indonesia

article en

Abstract

The integrity of the Constitutional Court of Indonesia, as one of the judicial authorities in the post-reform constitutional system, demands not only independence but also ethical accountability of its justices. While Article 24 of the 1945 Constitution and Law No. 48 of 2009 safeguard judicial independence, oversight mechanisms particularly ethical ones remain limited and internally controlled. The abolition of the Constitutional Court Honorary Council of Appeals (Majelis Kehormatan Banding) and the lack of external checks have raised critical questions about due process, institutional legitimacy, and legal certainty in judicial ethical enforcement. This research adopts a normative legal method, utilizing statute, case, and conceptual approaches. Primary legal sources include the 1945 Constitution, Law No. 48 of 2009 on Judicial Powers, Law No. 24 of 2003 and its amendments on the Constitutional Court, and Constitutional Court Regulations (PMK). These are analyzed alongside decisions of the Honorary Council (MKMK), academic literature, and comparative doctrines on judicial accountability and ethics. The findings reveal significant institutional and procedural weaknesses in the current ethical oversight system. The absence of an appeal mechanism against MKMK decisions and the concentration of oversight within the Court itself reduce transparency, weaken checks and balances, and potentially undermine public trust. Although the MKMK is tasked with maintaining judicial ethics, its structural dependency, lack of external participation, and limited procedural safeguards raise concerns about fairness and impartiality in high-stakes disciplinary decisions. This study argues for a comprehensive reconstruction of the ethical oversight f ramework for Constitutional Court justices. Reform is needed to enhance the independence of the MKMK, reestablish a credible appellate body, and institutionalize procedural guarantees in line with the principles of due process of law. Legal reform should also clarify the consequences of ethical violations and establish clearer norms for proportional sanctions. These efforts are essential to restore public confidence and ensure the Court’s legitimacy as the guardian of the Constitution.

Legal horizonsVol. 25(25)
University of Brawijaya (ID)
Openalex Percentile: Top 70%
Judicial and Constitutional Studies
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Reforming Ethical Oversight Mechanisms for Constitutional Court Justices in Indonesia · Legal horizons (2025) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS