Ratio Legis of Legal Differences between Ad Hoc and Career Judges in Indonesian Corruption Courts

Abstract

Corruption is a severe problem for every country in the world. This is related to the modus operandi and the impact of corruption that can destroy the economic order of a country. Realizing the consequences of corruption, we need extraordinary treatment in coping with corruption, one of which is by establishing an anti-corruption agency. This provision is adopted in Indonesian law in Law No. 46 of 2009 concerning the Corruption Court which was established based on the provisions of Article 35 of Law No. 30 of 2002 concerning the Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK) and based on the decision of the Constitutional Court No. 012-016-019/PUU-IV/2006 dated December 19, 2006. However, in the provisions of Article 1 and Article 10 of Law No. 46 of 2009 concerning the Court of Criminal Acts of Corruption, a provision distinguishes the legal position between ad hoc judges and career judges, which limits the principle of independence of judicial power, especially for ad hoc judges. This legal research used normative juridical approach. The data used were primary and secondary data which were analyzed using quantitative method. It was found that, first, the Corruption Court was established because of public distrust of the general court which examines and decides on corruption cases, low verdicts, non-transparent handling, and low integrity of legal apparatus; second, the meaning of ad hoc deviates to a particular purpose, instead of temporary or impermanent as its juridical interpretation.