ADVOCATE CODE OF ETHICS AT A GLANCE

Dr. EKO WIYONO, SH., M. Hum.
(Senior Advisor at Legis Priori Jakarta Law Office)

Condescending to Other Advocates During Proceedings
Is it in Accordance with Professional Ethics in the Law on Advocates?

When read at a glance, the above question gives the impression that it is only a question sentence that is less meaningful because sometimes it has become commonplace among fellow Advocates to attack each other with their respective arguments within the framework of fighting for the legal interests of their clients without realizing that for Advocates in carrying out their profession proceedings must remain within the boundaries of the ethical corridor in the form of the Advocate Professional Code of Ethics as stipulated in Law Number. 18 of 2003. However, it is quite intriguing to contemplate and understand more deeply in our hearts as human beings in the Advocate profession.

Law Number 18 of 2003 concerning Advocates can be said to be the culmination of the struggle of Advocates in Indonesia, where the concept of independence from government power is felt to be quite thick in this law in a substantial manner. This situation is reasonable and understandable because the Advocate Law in question was formed in the context of a situation that was still in the shadow of the authoritarian New Order even though the Advocate Law was enacted during the reform period.

In line with the opinion of Dr. Luhut MP Pangaribuan, SH, LLM that it has become an open secret recently that situational descriptions of the Advocate profession today can be said that the dignity of Advocates is increasingly being eroded in society, some even say it has fallen so that trust in Advocates is increasingly heading to its lowest point. Even though a trust is a very principle element in the Advocate profession as a provider of legal services to the community for their legal needs and interests and this is actually quite an actual and fundamental problem that is being faced and happening in the legal life of society.

Advocates are law enforcers who have an equal position with other law enforcement officials such as police, prosecutors and judges, so that the advocate profession is known as an honorable profession (officium nobile) where in carrying out their profession as an advocate they are under the protection of laws, laws and ethical norms. and must comply with the Advocate code of ethics. With regards to carrying out their profession, advocates have freedom based on honor and personality that adheres to independence, honesty, confidentiality and openness.

Therefore, it is not enough for an Advocate to be just right according to the law, but also required to be ethical, which can be seen from: first, before carrying out the mandate of the position he assumes as an Advocate, the Advocate has made a public pledge and the Chairman of the High Court to be a good statesman by his oath with the words “that I will uphold and practice Pancasila as the basis of the State and the Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia”. So that this pledge is required to be realized in every service provided by Advocates in the framework of Advocacy for clients which cannot be denied sometimes having to face each other with other Advocates who are also obliged to carry out the profession of defending the legal interests of their clients. Second, an Advocate before starting his respectable profession must also pledge anti-corruption, with the words “that in carrying out my professional duties inside or outside the court I will not give or promise anything to Judges, court officials or other officials in order to win or benefit the client’s case.” I am or will handle.

The Advocate Pledge is manifested in real and concrete terms in the Indonesian Advocate Code of Ethics (KEAI) and this KEAI in addition to being stated in Law Number 18 of 2003 concerning Advocates, especially in Article 9 which states in principle that Advocates are obliged to comply with ethical provisions as specified in the KEAI and specifically stated in the Preamble that KEAI is the “highest law in carrying out the Advocate profession”. the highest law that must be mutually upheld in practicing and carrying out the Advocate profession both inside and outside the courtroom.

WHAT IS THE ACCOUNTABILITY OF AN ADVOCATE

WHO VIOLATES THE CODE OF ETHICS SUCH AS

DEMEDIATES OTHER ADVOCATES? 

This question is a very simple and simple matter, but if we think about it, it contains a very high moral message, especially for Advocates in carrying out their respectable profession. Normatively, for an Advocate who violates the code of ethics, according to the provisions of Article 12, a complaint can be submitted to the Branch/Regional Honorary Council or the Branch/Regional Leadership Council or the Central Leadership Council where the Advocate is domiciled as the Defendant is a member. Complaints referred to must be submitted in writing accompanied by reasons. Meanwhile, parties who can complain about an Advocate who violates the Code of Ethics as stipulated in article 11 are: 1. Client, 2. Advocate’s colleagues, 3. Community members, and 4. Central/Branch/Regional Leadership Council of the Professional Organization where the Defendant is a member.

Furthermore, Article 16 stipulates that an Advocate who has been deemed proven to have violated the Advocate Code of Ethics may be given sanctions in the form of: 1. ordinary warning, 2. strict warning, 3. temporary dismissal, and 4. dismissal from membership in a Professional Organization. Thus the Indonesian Advocate Professional Code of Ethics is the Highest Law in carrying out the Advocate profession, which guarantees and protects but also imposes a moral and behavioral obligation on every Advocate to be honest and responsible in carrying out his profession both to Clients, Courts, State or Society and especially to myself.

However, sometimes and often unknowingly in providing assistance or in fighting for the legal interests of clients in the context of carrying out this respectable profession, because based on the sake of credibility and sincerity and seriousness in defending client rights, we become forgetful and even complacent. Advocates can act uncontrollably by ridiculing each other and even attacking and tearing each other down for the name and trust of the client in the Advocate. Even though one must not forget and deny for any reason the norms of limitation in carrying out the Advocate profession as a respectable profession regarding the existence of the Indonesian Advocate Code of Ethics (KEAI), which we often forget is the Highest Law which has the substance of ethical values ​​that must be obeyed, adhered to and upheld by fellow Advocates in carrying out their honorable profession.

In carrying out an Officium Nobile profession, although sometimes they have to face each other for the legal interests of each client, fellow colleagues in the profession are protected by the same Highest Law, namely the Indonesian Advocate Code of Ethics (KEAI), in the provisions of article 5 of the Law of the Republic of Indonesia Number 18 Year 2003 concerning Advocates, has clearly and firmly regulated the relationship of colleagues among fellow Advocates, namely:

1. The relationship between Advocate colleagues must be based on mutual respect, mutual respect and mutual trust;
2. Advocates, when discussing colleagues or when dealing with one another in court hearings, should not use profanity either orally or in writing;
3. Objections to the actions of colleagues deemed to be contrary to the Advocate Code of Ethics must be submitted to the Honorary Council for examination and are not allowed to be broadcast through the mass media or other means;
4. Advocates are not allowed to attract or seize a client from a colleague;
5. If the client wants to replace the Advocate, the new Advocate can only accept the case after receiving proof of the revocation of the power of attorney to the original Advocate and is obliged to remind the client to fulfill his obligations if there is still the original advocate;
6. If a case is later submitted by a client to a new Advocate, then the original Advocate is obliged to provide him with all the letters and information necessary to deal with the case, taking into account the Advocate’s retention rights to the client;

Observing the provisions textually the norms of article 5 of Law Number 18 of 2003 concerning Advocates as mentioned above, especially in number 2 which should not be understood narrowly but must be understood more broadly, namely that fellow Advocates face each other not only in court hearings. directly at the time of examination in the trial at the first level at the District Court, but it must also be understood also in the examination of cases at the appeal, cassation and review levels, namely by submitting legal arguments to each other as set forth in the Memorandum and Counter Memorandum must also be conveyed ethically and professional. So that it should be understood that the partnership between fellow Advocates in carrying out a profession that is upheld as an honorable profession (officium nobile), presumably is not an excess if fellow Advocates face each other in the judicial process both inside and outside the court, and also both in the context in conveying legal arguments verbally or in writing should be presented in a form that has an ethical nuance, full of politeness values ​​and is more dignified even though it is in a position that contradicts one another, keeping in mind what is being carried out and being carried out under the same umbrella. The Highest Law, namely the Indonesian Advocate Code of Ethics (KEAI) which is full of ethical norms that make us Advocates who are ethical and respect each other Advocates in the corridors of true fellowship.

So at a glance hopefully useful.

Thank You.