Myanmar’s National Human Rights Commission has just published a website. The site is quite sophisticated and contains a lot of information. Well worth checking out.
Monthly Archives: September 2013
Myanmar Human Rights Commission
Comments Off on Myanmar Human Rights Commission
Filed under Burma, human rights, MNHRC, Myanmar
The Toilet Incident (Indonesia)
Unfortunately, another day, another corruption scandal in Indonesia. According to The Jakarta Post, this time, Supreme Court justice candidate Sudrajad Dimyati was observed handing lawmaker Bachruddin Nashori of the National Awakening Party (PKB) an envelope while in a bathroom.
These instances of corruption are sad and frustrating for rule of law reformers in the country. However, they also raise an interesting theoretical question. Why do judges and lawmakers engage in cash transactions in order to effectuate political agreements? Given the risks in being exposed, why wouldn’t lawmakers make other compromises with judicial candidates?
For example, in the U.S., there is often an implicit agreement that judges appointed to federal court will rule in politically acceptable ways (i.e., Democrats rule in favor of liberal causes, Republicans for conservative causes). This allows lawmakers to claim political credit for policy victories and minimizes the risk of scandal (after all, Democratic voters want judges to support their causes, and vice versa for Republican voters).
I suspect part of the reason we don’t see such “policy-based corruption” in judicial appointments is that the Indonesian Supreme Court typically does not adjudicate politically salient issues. The court hears thousands of appeals each year, many of which deal with minor traffic issues or other criminal infractions. The justices have limited discretion over their docket (although my understanding is that some reforms are being proposed to exclude cases below a certain threshold). As such, we see little political mobilization around the content of Supreme Court decisions.
The value of the decisions is relatively high for the litigants involved, but relatively low for other stakeholders. If I’m right, this means that if lawmakers are going to extract value out of judicial nominations, it must be at the nomination stage and not in future decisions. By contrast, I suspect Constitutional Court (Mahkamah Konstitusi) cases are more likely to affect policy and act as a veto on lawmakers’ policies. As such, in MK fit-and-proper tests, we do see MPs expressing more concern about how justices will rule once they reach the bench. To my knowledge, there have been no allegations of cash transactions in the appointment of MK justices.
It would be interesting to compare media coverage of Supreme Court decisions with those of the Constitutional Court to see if and how often they do become politically salient. Perhaps a future paper.
UPDATE: The Jakarta Post is reporting another instance of alleged corruption during the process of nominating a judge. This time, Democrat Party Dasrul Djabar is alleged to have attempted to influence the Judicial Commission in return for an endorsement of a particular judicial candidate.
Comments Off on The Toilet Incident (Indonesia)
Filed under corruption, indonesia, Supreme Court
Speaking out for judicial independence (Myanmar/Burma)
There’s been a lot of news about judicial reform in Myanmar/Burma. Last month, the U.S. Agency for International Development issued a request for proposals on a rule of law project in Burma. Even more exciting, more and more lawyers in Myanmar are taking part in the reform process. Since 2010, lawyers have established legal aid networks to help indigent clients. They are now turning their attention to broader systematic reform of the judiciary. Lawyers are increasingly organizing conferences about judicial reform, such as this one reported in Mizzima. As noted by Prof. Melissa Crouch, Yangon University law schools has also become more open to engaging with foreign donors and universities. Hopefully these are signs that any legal reform process will be owned by local stakeholders and not driven by foreign donors.
Comments Off on Speaking out for judicial independence (Myanmar/Burma)
Filed under Burma, legal profession, Myanmar
News Roundup
Unfortunately, I have been too busy over the past month to discuss developments in Southeast Asia, but the region hasn’t stood still. Here’s a roundup of recent news:
Indonesia
- Former Mahkamah Konstitusi chief justice Mahfud MD has declared that he would not participate in the Democrat Party primary. He expressed his concern that the results of the primary would not be respected (source: Jakarta Globe).
Myanmar
- The Hluttaw has convened a joint committee to review and propose amendments to the 2008 Constitution (source: New Mandala). It expects its report to go to the floor by the end of this year (source: Eleven Myanmar). While the review process is generally going to be closed, the NLD has been campaigning to make the process more open to the public (source: Eleven Myanmar). Meanwhile, Speaker Shwe Mann has sent mixed signals, suggesting that he would consider changes to the eligibility requirements of presidential candidates but would not bow to outside pressure (source: Myanmar Times). By contrast, Shwe Mann recently announced his support for federalism while speaking in Shan State (source: DVB). Federalism of course had until recently been considered anathema by senior military leaders.
- The Hluttaw is also considering an amendment to the bill on writs. According to Legal Affairs Committee chairman Thura Aung Ko, currently decisions on writs are often decided only by a single justice, which leaves petitioners at the mercy of individual justices. The amendment would require cases to be decided by a bench (source: Myanmar Times). Melissa Crouch has an article about the history of writs in Myanmar (source: I-CONnect).
Comments Off on News Roundup
Filed under Burma, indonesia, Myanmar, News Roundup
Dominic J. Nardi, Jr. 