RATIO LEGIS OF JUDICIAL POWER INDEPENDENCE IN CORRUPTION CRIMINAL COURTS: A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF INDONESIA AND HONG KONG

In a nation that adheres to the concept of the separation of powers based on the trias politica principle, the state's authority is divided among the executive, legislative, and judicial branches. Regarding the judicial branch, it operates with the principle of judicial independence, which is essential for upholding human rights, the rule of law, and justice. To apply this principle, judges are required to perform their duties in accordance with their oath and the law, without any external interference or directives. In Indonesia's legal framework, Article 24, Paragraph (2) of the 1945 Constitution outlines the exercise of judicial authority by the Supreme Court and various subordinate judicial bodies, including those with general, religious, military, and administrative jurisdiction, as well as the Constitutional Court. This research employs a comparative legal approach, analyzing the legal systems of both Indonesia and Hong Kong to enhance the coherence of national law by evaluating it in relation to another country's legal structure. The findings of this study are as follows: Firstly, the establishment of corruption criminal courts in Indonesia aligns with international agreements such as the United Nations Convention against Corruption (UNCAC) and the Declaration of Human Rights. However, the Indonesian system employs an ad hoc structure and ad hoc judges, which introduce certain vulnerabilities in ensuring the independence of these judges. Secondly, in Hong Kong, the establishment of corruption criminal courts is constitutionally guaranteed and institutionalized. Hong Kong's constitution explicitly prohibits the creation of ad hoc courts, resulting in a permanent and non-ad hoc court structure. As a result, the assurance of judicial independence for judges in Hong Kong is more robust and secure.