Netralitas Profesi Hakim di Tengah Intervensi Politik

Abstract

The constitutional court is an institution of judicial power in the judicial system of the state administration in Indonesia. Constitutional judges must be neutral and do not own or accommodate the interests of the institution that appoints them because in essence a judge instills the principle of impartiality because constitutional judges are the final interpreters of the constitution which aim to be guardians of the constitution. The Ethics Council of Constitutional Judges has the authority to maintain the morality of judge ethics, examines minor or serious violations regarding the judge's code of ethics and has the authority to respond to complaints from the public or institutions and provide recommendations or notices of dismissal to judges if the judge violates the code of ethics already contained in regulation. The purpose of this study is to analyze political phenomena that occur in the realm of our state administration because of the alleged abuse of power by the institution that appoints constitutional judges, namely (DPR). The method used in this study is the mixed method of elaborating normative juridical and empirical juridical methods with primary data obtained from interviews and secondary data obtained from literature relating to the constitutional court itself. The results of this study show that the appointment of a constitutional judge who is appointed from 3 (three) different institutions aims for each judge to have a different background so that the different backgrounds are expected to be able to interpret the constitution from various perspectives, not just a mere political issue. Filling the position of constitutional judges should be far from political transactional interests, because a judge must fully adhere to the principles of independence and impartiality so as not to injure the mandate as guardian of the constitution.