THE JUDICIARY IN INDONESIA IS CRITICALLY WEAK, BUT CAN BE REPAIRED

July 3, 2003 1:38 PM PRESS RELEASE World Bank Office Jakarta Jalan Cik Ditiro 68A Menteng Jakarta Pusat INDONESIA Phone : 310-7158, 3911-908/9 E-mails: Matt Stephens: mstephens@worldbank.org, Taufik Rinaldi: trinaldi@worldbank.org, Bambang Soetono: kecuk_tono@yahoo.com, Su Lin Lewis: slewis1@worldbank.org, Dyan Shinto Ekopuri: dekopuri@worldbank.org, or Andrea Woodhouse: awoodhouse@worldbank.org THE JUDICIARY IN INDONESIA IS CRITICALLY WEAK, BUT CAN BE REPAIRED Jakarta, July 4, 2003 Around 70 participants gathered today to take part in a discussion entitled Judicial Corruption in Indonesia. The participants concluded the half-day session with a clear message: the Indonesian court system is critically weak, but can be repaired. The active participants came from various stakeholder groups, including representatives from the academic community, civil society, government, judiciary, and press. The event was part of a World Bank-sponsored program called Justice for The Poor which supports initiatives to enhance community access to justice and to promote the creation of a more transparent and accountable justice sector. Among the panelists who spoke and triggered the discussion were an active judge, an NGO activist, and a legal researcher affiliated with an international agency. Corruption, which is widespread in almost every sector in Indonesia, also permeates justice sector institutions. A survey done by The Asia Foundation in 2001, found that around 57% of the respondents agreed that the Indonesian legal system is corrupt (See attachment: Survey Result). Court corruption is considered the worst form of corruption because the court is the last resort for justice-seekers, said Sahlan Said, an active judge at the Yogyakarta Municipal Court. Corruption methods take place in various stages and format - from verdict-trading to abuse of managerial power. These practices are the result of a weak legal system which has no accountability mechanism in place. The participants concurred that laying the foundations for faster and sustainable growth requires a transitional process from a network based society to a rule based society. They also agreed that for democracy to succeed, a judiciary that has the trust and confidence of the people is vital. The marginalization and degradation of the legal system over the past 20-30 years has reduced legal certainty and damaged public faith in the justice sector, thus creating a society based not on rules, but on networks, said Rifqi Assegaf, a representative of LeIP, an NGO a conducted the recent audit of the Supreme Court to help identify areas for reform (See attachment: Supreme Court Audit). The fact that this important task was assigned to an NGO by the Supreme Court is noteworthy in itself, he continued. Indonesia is not the only country in the region facing to this challenge. The World Bank is working closely with many governments across the globe to assist the establishment of a more efficient and responsive judiciary, said Jamil Kassum, World Bank Vice

July 3, 2003 1:38 PM President for East Asia and the Pacific. We are supporting, for example, a broadreaching reform program of the Philippine judiciary, he continued. These activities reflect that the World Bank s approach has broadened from supporting specific law reforms aimed at economic development to including activities which specifically prioritize the needs of poor people. And we re doing this through programs like Justice for The Poor, he added. Justice for The Poor will support the development of legal aid programs, communitybased legal education, the creation of court monitoring groups, and better functioning of and access to alternative dispute resolution mechanisms. The program works closely with local NGOs and other civil society organizations operating at the local level, said Dyan Shinto Nugroho, team member at the Justice for The Poor. It focuses less on the well-understood reasons for corruption and weaknesses in the judiciary, but more on understanding the preconditions for a successful bottom-up approach to legal reform, she continued. Today s discussion was intended to contribute to the process of supporting reform by openly acknowledging the challenges of overcoming judicial corruption in Indonesia. ***

Citizen s Perceptions of the Indonesian Justice Sector Attachment 1 Citizen s Perceptions of the Indonesian Justice Sector - Summary of The Asia Foundation Survey, August 2001 Summary The survey delivered largely predictable results highlighting low public awareness of legal rights and how to enforce them, and low levels of satisfaction with the justice system as a whole. The police and the general courts fared particularly poorly. The survey affirmed that the majority of people prefer informal solutions to their legal problems. The formal legal system is a remote consideration and many citizens feel powerless to change this. Low understanding of the law and fundamental rights is especially severe among females, people with lower levels of education and rural populations. The survey highlights critical needs to: 1. promote increased public understanding of fundamental rights, law and the legal system 2. strengthen the capacity of formal legal institutions and alternative dispute resolution mechanisms to meet citizen needs. 3. strengthen the quality and scope of legal assistance services available to citizens. There were some positive outcomes. Religious courts, religious leaders and community leaders were seen as accessible and trustworthy facilitators of conflict resolution. Citizens believe the legal system can be improved and that the government cares about the views of ordinary people Key Findings Knowledge of the law Only 56% of respondents could identify a single legal right to which they were entitled. This drops to 34% among females, 33% in rural areas and 3% for those lacking any formal education. Criminal matters dominate the list of disputes that respondents understood as being subject to legal action. They were followed by land-related disputes. Only 12% viewed domestic violence as a problem definitely subject to law. Public awareness of the existence of community leaders, religious leaders, the police and the courts is high. However, knowledge of legal aid institutions, other legal NGOs and the National Ombudsman Commission is low. Sources of information Television is rated by respondents as the primary source of information on legal rights and the legal system (79%), followed by radio and newspapers (49% and 48% respectively). Traditional word of mouth sources such as family or friends, neighbourhood or community meetings and local religious centres or organisations remain important, but of lesser significance, rating as the primary source for between 10-27% of respondents. The majority of respondents (60%) believe that community leaders have the primary responsibility for informing citizens about laws and regulations, followed by the government (50%), the courts (31%), religious leaders and the press (25% each) and the President (18%). Where do people go to solve their problems, and why? For a combination of practical and cultural considerations, local level informal dispute resolution is easily the preferred manner of resolving disputes. 86% believe musyawarah is preferable to 1

Citizen s Perceptions of the Indonesian Justice Sector Attachment 1 court or other formal procedures. Of those who had actually experienced a dispute in the last 10 years, 57% pursued non-formal solutions. 18% pursued formal action and 32% did nothing. Practical factors Local means are the most accessible - respondents are most familiar with the procedures for bringing problems before community and religious leaders (93% and 74% respectively). Only 25% were familiar with the proceedings to bring a case to the general courts. Religious leaders, religious courts and community leaders were also rated as the most effective means of dispute resolution. The legal system is considered corrupt - 57% believe it to be as corrupt as ever. 48% believe they are powerless to change this. The main perceived problems with the justice sector were seen as corruption (18%), failure to solve cases (16%) and lack of technical skills (7%). Are they satisfied with the service? 83% of respondents were satisfied with musyawarah as a means of conflict resolution. Of the small number of respondents who had actually taken a case to the general courts, a surprising 85% rated the outcome as satisfactory. This is despite the fact that the general courts were most commonly described as apt to demanding bribes, corrupt, unreliable, disrespectful and arrogant. Of those who chose the police, satisfaction levels were much lower, averaging 52%. Dissatisfaction stemmed from excessive time to resolve the dispute, the (unofficial) expense for the service, failure to resolve the dispute and a feeling that the police were acting in selfinterest. 2

Attachment 2 The Supreme Court Audit The Asia Foundation and the Partnership for Governance Reform have supported the Indonesian Institute for Independent Judiciary (LeIP) to conduct an institutional reform and development study or institutional audit of the Supreme Court of Indonesia, in collaboration with the Supreme Court. The audit is intended to identify the primary institutional reform and development challenges confronting the Supreme Court, as informed by inputs from a variety of stakeholders, including Supreme Court justices, Court registrars, and administrative personnel. This collaborative initiative is being strongly supported by Chief Justice Bagir Manan. A circulation draft of the study report was completed in late August 2002 and submitted to the Chief Justice for review. The report covers eight main areas of focus : (1) status and functions;(2) organization; (3) resources (4) accountability and transparency; (5) information management systems;(6) human resources; (7) case management; and (8) supervision and discipline. The report reflects the inputs of a combination of stakeholders, which were gathered through in-depth interviews and consultative workshops. The audit is an important first step in defining priority institutional and procedural reforms within the Supreme Court. Although independent assessments by outside researchers have been conducted in the past, the study is the first of its kind to be conducted through a collaborative working relationship between the Supreme Court and a local non-governmental organization with a special focus on judicial reform. The study report and the process through which it was developed serve as a model for future partnership of this kind between civil society organizations and justice sector institutions in addressing institutional reform issues

Opening Statement Jemal-ud-din Kassum, World Bank Vice President for East Asia and Pacific *delivery copy Seminar on Corruption in the Judiciary Thursday, July 3, 2003 Hotel Crowne Plaza, Jakarta Judicial corruption is not a phenomenon unique to Indonesia. Many countries across the world are recognizing the importance of the problem and are tackling it. - Judicial corruption is the worst form of corruption, because if justice is for sale, then oversight of the executive and broad-reaching governance improvement will be impossible. - This can have a devastating impact on development, including severely reducing the effectiveness of development aid. The Asian economic crisis demonstrated that a sound economic architecture is essential for growth, but an effective legal and judicial system is paramount for equitable growth. - Market forces alone without rule of law can lead to uneven distribution of wealth an increased poverty. Some of Indonesia s ASEAN neighbors have begun to tackle judicial weaknesses and support the creation of a society based on rule of law. - The Philippines, for example, has launched a comprehensive judicial reform program. This program is championed by the Chief Justice himself and has the unambiguous support of the Philippine Government. - This level of political will is an essential precondition for effective reform. It is now all the more important that the Indonesian Government also recognize the value of having an effective judiciary that has its citizens confidence and to demonstrate this with visible, credible actions. A 1996 Bappenas-led comprehensive assessment of the Indonesian justice sector that was funded by the World Bank concluded that the situation was desperate, but not hopeless. - Seven years on, many would argue little has changed. The perception is widespread that corruption is still rife throughout the judiciary. The elimination of corruption in the justice sector requires a determined political will. Political will in turn is most likely to be generated when the demand for reform is broad- Page of 1 2

based: it requires genuine commitment both from the elites and bottom-up demand from ordinary people. There is also some cause of optimism that Indonesia can address the challenge of judicial corruption. Opportunities for positive action do exist. - Increased media freedom and rights to political expression have opened up space for far greater public scrutiny of the courts. - Many NGOs are actively engaged in the law making and reform process. The donor community has a role to play to support pro-reform elements in Indonesia to grasp these opportunities. The World Bank will support this process where it can. - For instance, last year the Bank launched the Justice for the Poor program, a new initiative which aims to promote legal reform through community empowerment. - Justice for the Poor will support community legal education, legal aid, court watch groups and other activities to increase access to justice and enhance transparency and the accountability of the legal apparatus. - Today s seminar is a part of this program. However, we cannot get away from a basic truth: reform has to begin here with a facing up to the fact that things need to be fixed. We all have to be willing to acknowledge the nature of the problems. It is for this reason that we are delighted to welcome three prominent guest speakers today who will discuss the problem of judicial corruption from different perspectives a first hand account from the frontline, a view from civil society, and an external assessment. We hope that this interesting combination of views will create a lively debate today. Thank you for your attendance. *** Page of 2 2