JAKARTA, KOMPAS — The revelations of a number of corruption cases involving officials of the judicial system recently reflects the failure of our judicial and law enforcement systems. Ironically, the system is now seen by many as difficult to correct and improve. If neglected, the condition will not only shatter public trust on law enforcement in Indonesia but will also plunge Indonesia into a failed state. "This is a warning sign that must be taken seriously, especially by our judicial system," House of Representatives Commission III deputy chief from Democratic Party faction, Benny K Harman, said at the House in Senayan, Jakarta, on Friday (17/6/2016). The arrest of North Jakarta district court official Rohadi on June 15 for allegedly receiving bribes to reduce the sentence of celebrity and convicted child molester Saipul Jamil was just the latest in a string of cases involving court officials exposed by the Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK). The KPK is still investigating the possibility of involvement of other parties, including judges, in thie case. KPK spokeswoman Yuyuk Andriati said that the KPK had searched the offices of the panel of judges at the North Jakarta district court on Thursday evening. Previously, in May 2016, the KPK arrested Bengkulu Corruption Court judges Janner Purba and Toton for receiving bribes to manipulate the sentence in the case of alleged embezzlement of M Yunus General Hospital Advisory Board honorarium payments. In 2015, the KPK arrested three Medan State Administrative Court (PTUN) judges Tripeni Irianto Putro, Amir Fauzi and Dermawan Ginting, for receiving bribes in a processing of a lawsuit by the North Sumatera provincial government at the PTUN. Apart from these three cases, a number of other court officials have also been legally processed by the KPK due to corruption. These cases have worsened the images of judges and judicial institutions. The result of a poll by Kompas research and development unit shows that 75.7 percent of respondents see judges with a negative image. Some 92.7 percent of respondents are certain of the proliferating bribery and corruption network within the judicial system. A research by World Justice Project Rule of Law Index 2015 put Indonesia on rank 52 out of 102 countries. The research measured public perception on law enforcement. In South East Asia, Indonesia is ranked below the Philippines (ranked 50), Malaysia (39) and Singapore (9). The numerous bribery cases have made Gary Goodpaster writes in his book Law Reform in Developing and Transition States (2007), "The legal system in Indonesia cannot truly be trusted, it cannot be used to obtain a honest ruling - but it may be trusted to protect corrupt activities." Resistant Vice President Jusuf Kalla said that improvements of the justice system, transparence and mental were urgent to end bribery in judicial institutions. Increases of salary and allowances for court officials do not insure that judicial institutions are freed from bribery or corruption cases. KPK deputy chief Saut Situmorang said that the KPK would be ready to assist judicial institutions to self-improve. "We have to learn from countries that nearly break up due to corruption. This is why our judicial system must be absolutely strict and harsh in upholding justice, the truth and honesty," he said. KPK deputy chief of prevention affairs Pahala Nainggolan added that the commission would establish a team to assess the administrative system and case-handling procedures at the Supreme Court (MA) and lower courts. Transparency International Indonesia secretary general Dadang Trisasongko said that corruption in judicial institutions are caused mainly by poor internal monitoring. The collapse of internal monitoring is due to the festering corrupt mindset on many judicial officials, including judges, court officials and structural employees. Zainal Arifin Mochtar from Gajah Mada University's Anticorruption Studies Center (Pukat UGM) said that monitoring judicial institutions can be done by strengthening the role of the Judicial Commission (KY) through revising the KY Law and MA Law. This strengthening must be in line with an awareness at the Constitutional Court (MK) that independent judicial power will only do well with a high integrity. If the integrity is low but independence is increased, transactions of court sentence will take place. Through this understanding, MK is hoped not to reduce KY's monitoring authority once strengthened. Benny K Harman said that the House would attempt to strengthen KY's authority through the Judges draft bill, which is currently still under deliberations. This strengthening would be done by providing KY with an executorial authority in its rulings and deliberations. Thus far, KY's rulings on the evaluation and monitoring of judges are final but not binding. As a result, out of the 116 KY recommendations on judges found to have violated the judges' code of ethics and code of conduct in 2015, only 12 were followed up or received by MA. However, Benny pitied MA's rejection of the idea. "The MA is highly resistant. In the end, a number of already-reformist laws are not implemented well," Benny said. Previously, MA spokesman Suhadi said that the KY could not force the MA to adhere to KY's recommendations, as several of the recommendations were about judicial technicalities (Kompas, 8/6/2016). (GAL/IRE/AGE/AHA)