Legal Literacy - This article discusses the concept of contempt of court which includes the definition, scope, and legal arrangements in Indonesia and several other countries. In general, contempt of court it is defined as an act that ignores or violates court orders, either directly or indirectly, which can degrade the authority and dignity of the judiciary. This article also outlines the differences between civil contempt and criminal contempt, and provides examples of well-known cases in Indonesia, such as the cases of Adnan Buyung Nasution and Desrizal Chaniago. In addition, the discussion includes regulations governing contempt of court at the international level, such as in Australia, the United States, England, and India. This article concludes with the importance of strict rule enforcement to maintain the honor of the judicial institution.
The Term Contempt of Court
If examined terminologically, contempt of court it is defined as an act committed intentionally to ignore or disobey the orders of a legitimate authority according to the law.
Contempt of court according to Black’s Law Dictionary is any act that can be considered to embarrass, obstruct or hinder the judicial duties of the judicial bodies or any act that can reduce its authority or dignity. The act is carried out intentionally against its authority or thwarting the judicial duties carried out by someone by being a party in the case being tried who intentionally disobeys a legitimate court order.
Contempt of court can also be described as an act that essentially interferes with or disrupts the judicial process or prohibits members of the public from forgiving the judicial system in resolving their disputes.
Contempt of Court Arrangements
Contempt of court can be found in the general explanation of Law Number 14 of 1985 concerning the Supreme Court which explains that:
“In order to better guarantee the creation of the best possible atmosphere for the administration of justice in order to uphold law and justice based on Pancasila, it is necessary to create a law that regulates actions, behavior, attitudes and words that can degrade the authority, dignity and honor of the judiciary known as Contempt of Court.”
Not only that, several legal umbrellas that regulate contempt of court are currently listed in the Criminal Code, specifically Articles 207, 217, and 224. In connection with this, the main objective of contempt of court itself, namely maintaining the effectiveness and maintaining the power of the court and protecting the parties in dispute by forcing the court's order to be carried out properly.
Several countries in the world have also adopted provisions regarding contempt of court, such as Australia, contempt of court regulated in several regulations Federal Court and state courts, such as Judiciary Act 1903 and Federal Court of Australia Act 1976. The United States regulates it through Contempt of Court Act 1831 and has undergone several changes. Different from several other countries, the concept contempt of court in England is to associate contempt of court with contempt of the queen/king. Neighboring India also has Contempt of Court Act 1971.
Scope of Contempt of Court
Scope contempt of court can be distinguished into direct contempt of court (direct contempt) and indirect contempt (indirect contempt). Direct contempt is intended, that is, when an act of contempt occurs in front of a court hearing that causes disruption, for example the case that occurred to advocate Adnan Buyung Nasution. Meanwhile, indirect contempt is contempt that occurs outside of a court hearing. This act is usually aimed at opposing the administration of justice by refusing to carry out court orders. An example of this occurred in the United States when a labor leader refused to end a strike, which of course included acts of opposing execution.
Not only that, it can be understood contempt of court divided into civil contempt and criminal contempt. The first concept is forms of non-compliance with court decisions or orders. In other words, the form is resistance to law enforcement. While the second is forms of actions that aim to disrupt or obstruct the proper administration of justice
Agreeing regarding contempt of court, Prof. Oemar Seno Adji argues that behavior that can be categorized as contempt of court divided into:
- Misbehaving in court (misbehaving in court)
- Disobeying court orders (disobeying court orders)
- Scandalizing the court (scandalizing the court)
- Obstruction justice (obstruction justice)
- Contempt of court through publication and notification (sub-judice rule)
Furthermore, another opinion regarding the scope of contempt of court comes from Asterlay Jones and RIE Card, namely:
- Contempt in the face of court
- Scandalizing the court
- Reprisal against jurors and witness
- Obstructing officer court
- Conduct liablel to prejudice the fair trial or conduct of pending or imminent proceding
- Publication which prejudice issue in pending procedings
Contempt of Court Cases in Indonesia
Phenomenon contempt of court this has become widespread in Indonesia. Not only ordinary people, but also highly educated people are enlivening the trial with actions and words that refer to contempt of court. Initially contemp of court this emerged when the case of advocate Adnan Buyung Nasution was declared to have committed contempt of court with his protest when defending in the case of H.R. Dharsono on charges of subversion. Adnan Buyung Nasution caused a commotion in court which resulted in the advocate finally receiving a reprimand which in the end the IKADIN Honorary Council stated that the act was a violation of the code of ethics. Because of this incident, a Decree of the Minister of Justice of the Republic of Indonesia was sent to Adnan Buyung Nasution who was officially suspended from his profession for 1 (one) year.
Cases related to contempt of court others came from the case of lawyer Tommy Winata, Desrizal Chaniago, as a suspect in the beating of a judge. In short, the emotions that controlled Desrizal made him a suspect for beating the judge when the judge read the verdict. The case occurred when the panel of judges read the verdict related to the civil case number 228/pdt.G/2018/PN Jakpus. From this incident, Desrizal was charged with assault and articles against state legal officials. Apart from this case, the actions of parties involved in the trial that are often considered trivial can also be categorized as contempt of court, such as noisy and impolite courtroom audiences during the trial.
Not only in the trial process, some cases contempt of court Out-of-court contempt also occurs in Indonesia, such as the burning of the Larantuka District Court office by demonstrators who were dissatisfied with the two-month sentence handed down to Father Frans Amanue Pr. Then, there was the case of the burning of the Maumere District Court office as a protest against the execution of Fabianus Tibo, Dominggus da Silva, and Marianus Riwu. These are some examples of cases. contempt of court both carried out directly in front of the trial or outside the trial that has occurred in Indonesia.
References
- Afriana, Anita et al. “Contempt of Court: Law Enforcement and Regulatory Models in Indonesia.” Jurnal Hukum dan Peradilan. Vol 7, No.3 (2018)
- Hamzah, Andi. 2023. Crimes against the Administration of Justice (Contempt of Court). Bandung: P.T.Alumni.
- Jayanti, Dian. 2022. “Definition of Contempt Of Court?” Accessed on September 19, 2024 at https://www.hukumonline.com/klinik/a/contempt-of-court-lt514052dfdcf3b/
- Johny, Ruby Hadiarti. "Contempt Of Court (Study on Basic Ideas and Implementation in Criminal Law)", Jurnal Dinamika Hukum Vol. 9 No. 2 Mei (2009).
- Criminal Code (KUHP)
- Law Number 14 of 1985 concerning the Supreme Court
- Wahyu. 2005. Contempt of Court in the 2005 Draft Criminal Code. Jakarta: Elsam, p. 5.
Write a comment