DPR revokes its own decision, Adies Kadir’s proposal as a candidate for MK judge is considered full of political engineering

Viralterkini.id – The Indonesian DPR’s decision to revoke approval for Inosentius Samsul as a candidate for Constitutional Justice and replace him with Golkar Party politician, Adies Kadir, has raised a big question mark in the public sphere.

This step is considered not merely administrative, but indicates political engineering in filling the strategic position of guardian of the constitution. In fact, previously, Inosentius Samsul had passed the fit and proper test at the DPR Commission III meeting on Wednesday (20/8/2025).

This approval was then confirmed through the DPR Plenary Meeting on Thursday (21/8/2025) and stated in DPR Decree Number 11/DPR.RI/1/2025–2026. However, the decision that had been hammered was canceled midway.

DPR Commission III proposed Adies Kadir’s name as a replacement. All factions in Commission III approved the proposal at the Public Hearing Meeting (RDPU) on Monday (26/1/2026).

A day later, the 12th DPR Plenary Meeting for Session III Session Year 2025–2026 officially approved Adies Kadir as a candidate for Constitutional Justice proposed by the DPR while simultaneously revoking the previous decision.

“Can it be approved? Agreed, thank you,” said Deputy Speaker of the DPR and chairman of the meeting, Saan Mustopa, while chairing the plenary session at the DPR Building, Jakarta, Tuesday (27/1/2026).

This change also has an impact on the leadership structure of the DPR. The position of Deputy Speaker of the DPR previously held by Adies Kadir was replaced by a Golkar Party politician from Commission III of the DPR, Sari Yuliati, based on a letter from the Golkar Party DPP dated January 26 2026 regarding the interim replacement of DPR leadership for the remainder of the 2024–2029 term of office.

Chairman of Commission III DPR, Habiburokhman, stated that the replacement of constitutional judge candidates was carried out in the constitutional interests of the DPR and to strengthen the Constitutional Court (MK).

“DPR Commission III considers that the Constitutional Court needs to be strengthened to maintain its dignity and return to its essential duties and functions,” said Habiburokhman at a plenary meeting in Jakarta, Tuesday (27/1/2026).

He emphasized the need for a constitutional judge with comprehensive legal capacity and a good track record.

“Therefore, Commission III of the DPR considers it important to have a constitutional judge who has a thorough understanding of the law and a brilliant track record in the world of law,” he said.

However, this reason actually sparked strong criticism from academic circles. Andalas University Constitutional Law lecturer, Feri Amsari, believes that the DPR is playing a political scenario in determining the composition of constitutional judges.

“What happened was not the selection of constitutional referees, but the arrangement of the composition of judges to suit political interests,” said Feri Amsari in Padang, Tuesday (27/1/2026).

According to Feri, the process of changing constitutional judge candidates was carried out suddenly, was not transparent, and ignored basic constitutional principles.

“If the election of constitutional judges is carried out without clear procedures, suddenly replaced, and not made public, then the DPR is playing with the constitution,” he stressed.

He considered that the DPR’s steps were ethically and constitutionally flawed because they were not carried out openly and without legal arguments that could be tested by the public.

“This is not valid according to constitutional ethics. The process is not open and very political,” he said.

Feri also highlighted the DPR’s recurring pattern in the constitutional judge selection mechanism which is often problematic.

“The DPR has a bad track record in selecting Constitutional Court judges. There are always conflicts of interest and procedures that change according to political needs,” he said.

According to Feri, the replacement of Innocentius Samsul, which had previously been approved in the plenary session, shows that the DPR’s political decisions can be annulled easily without adequate explanation.

“The DPR creates its own scenario. Candidates who have been approved can simply be replaced. This shows that the law is defeated by political calculations,” he stressed.

He warned that this kind of practice has the potential to damage public trust in the Constitutional Court as the final guardian of the constitution.

“If the process is like this, the public will see the Constitutional Court no longer as an independent institution, but as an extension of political interests,” he said.

Feri emphasized the need for a thorough evaluation of the mechanism for selecting constitutional judges by the DPR.

“This needs to be seriously evaluated. If not, the DPR will increasingly be perceived by the public as not working for the interests of the people, but for its own interests,” concluded Feri Amsari. (**)