DPR Rules Apply,  Former Constitutional Court Judge Aswanto: Many will be dismissed like me

JAKARTA, KOMPAS – Former constitutional judge Aswanto believes that the latest House of Representatives Rules of Procedure, which grant the authority to the people's representatives to evaluate the state officials they have chosen, cannot be allowed. This provision is very dangerous and will result in setbacks for legal and democratic improvements.

"This is the same as what I experienced, right? The DPR cannot remove me, but they (DPR) recommend to the President, which in the end is approved. In fact, it should not be like that. But that has already happened. And at that time, there were no rules that justified it. Now, especially after there are rules that justify it. I think it will not be just one or two, but many more in the future," said Aswanto when met at the Constitutional Court (MK) building, Jakarta, Friday (7/2/2025).

On September 29, 2022, the DPR unilaterally removed Aswanto from his position as a constitutional judge. The process of Aswanto's removal was swift. In the morning, Commission III of the DPR held a meeting inviting Guntur Hamzah, who at that time served as the Secretary General of the Constitutional Court, to inquire about his willingness to become a constitutional judge replacing Aswanto. By the afternoon, the replacement of the constitutional judge was immediately brought to and approved in the DPR plenary session.

At that time, the Chairman of Commission III of the House of Representatives, Bambang Wuryanto, revealed that Aswanto's replacement was due to his annulment of laws made by the House of Representatives. In fact, Aswanto was a constitutional judge elected by the House of Representatives. Aswanto was considered to lack commitment to safeguarding the products of the House of Representatives.

According to Aswanto, the authority of the DPR to evaluate state officials has the potential to make the related officials afraid to act independently.

"This is very dangerous. In the end, we worry that those who want to stay inside (as officials) will not dare to make decisions or take actions that could harm the supporting institutions. This is very dangerous. I think this is a significant regression," he said.

He stated that the DPR's Rules of Procedure can be subject to judicial review by the Supreme Court. This is because the authority to review regulations below the level of law lies with the Supreme Court.

Meanwhile, Titi Anggraini, an election law lecturer at the Faculty of Law, University of Indonesia, opines that testing the DPR's rules to the Supreme Court is not the ideal path. Although the testing of regulations below the law is indeed the authority of the Supreme Court, there are issues of norms that are constitutionally problematic.

"The substance in it (DPR's Tatib) is not only contrary to the law, but also contrary to the constitution. If the test only refers to the law, it is possible that the unconstitutionality aspect will not be that far to be assessed," said Titi.

Moreover, there is experience that several tests of provisions under the law carried out by the Supreme Court have actually caused problems.

Titi gave an example, the testing of the age requirements for regional head candidates which the Supreme Court stated must be calculated from the time the candidate pair was inaugurated. The issue became a highlight until finally the Constitutional Court (MK) decided in the testing of the Regional Election Law that the age requirements for regional head candidates were calculated from the time the candidate pair was determined.

"Moreover, this is an issue of the constitutionality of the norm, which if only tested at the level of law can distort the fundamental problems we face," he said. Titi emphasized that the latest DPR Tatib must be canceled.

Titi also agrees more if it is tested at the level of the law (to the Constitutional Court). For example, the Corruption Eradication Commission Law is tested specifically asking for a limited interpretation of provisions related to the evaluation and dismissal of KPK leaders, for example, or other similar laws.

In relation to this, the Coordinator of the Indonesian Anti-Corruption Society (MAKI) Boyamin Saiman has planned to test the KPK Law at the Constitutional Court. He will ask the Constitutional Court to provide an interpretation of the provisions for the dismissal of KPK leaders, whether the DPR's recommendation can be a reason for the dismissal of the anti-corruption agency.

In addition to legal channels, efforts to cancel the DPR Tatib can also be done through political channels. President Prabowo as the leader of a grand coalition, a coalition of eight of the nine political parties supporting the government that have seats in parliament, can intervene, for example, by asking the coalition parties not to allow the provision to exist.

"Prabowo's position as the leader of a coalition consisting of the majority of parties in parliament can relatively intervene in policy," he said.

According to Titi, it is important for Prabowo to do this so that his government does not leave a bad legacy. When political parties make unconstitutional policies, it can be linked to Prabowo's government, especially since the leadership of the coalition party is very dominant in the DPR.

Meanwhile, the Palace did not want to comment on the DPR's decision to expand its authority. This is because the rules of procedure are binding rules within the DPR organization.

"We do not want to comment on the DPR's rules of procedure. Because the rules of procedure are binding on the DPR organization," said Head of the Presidential Communications Office Hasan Nasbi in Jakarta, Friday (7/2/2025).

He also emphasized that there is no polemic between the Government and the DPR regarding the revision of the tatib. Currently, the relationship between the executive and the legislature is fine. "So far I think there is no polemic, the polemic is only in the media. Between the government and the DPR so far there is no polemic," said Hasan.