Ada Pertanyaan? Hubungi Kami 
2026 Hak Cipta Milik Hukumonline.com
Produk Pilihan
Ada Pertanyaan? Hubungi Kami
Marcell Sihombing, Hasyry Agustin
The authority to impose any such sanctions falls upon the shoulders of the country’s advocate associations, including the Indonesian Advocates Association (PERADI). Unfortunately however, this association is currently divided into three factions, specifically the Juniver Girsang, Fauzie Hasibuan and Luhut Pangaribuan factions. This split has taken its toll and has led to a number of difficulties as regards the monitoring of the implementation of any pro-bono work undertaken by PERADI members, due to uncertainties regarding which faction actually has such oversight authority. Such monitoring is seen as vital however and tracks the progress of all PERADI members who are subject to the mandatory 50-hour pro-bono work per year stipulation, regardless of their factional allegiances.
In a bid to seek a solution, representatives from the three PERADI factions this week declared their willingness to reconcile. According to Rivai Kusumanegara, a representative from the Fauzie Hasibuan faction, the distribution of lawyers is key for successful pro-bono work and requires one unified pool from which to draw .
Mr. Kusumanegara added that PERADI is aiming to implement more concrete measures while waiting for this unification to materialize, such as encouraging lawyers to assist any underprivileged citizens who are in need of legal assistance. With this end in mind, PERADI is currently running a number of free legal-counseling events, which are being supported by 1,000 lawyers drawn from the three factions in question.
“Ideally speaking, the best move would be for the three factions to unite once again under a single PERADI flag in order to reach a greater proportion of the Indonesian population,” Mr. Kusumanegara emphasized.
Representing the Luhut Pangaribuan faction, Sugeng Teguh Santoso showed his appreciation for the Fauzie Hasibuan faction’s desire to reunite and see a successful implementation of the mandatory pro-bono work policy. Mr. Santoso also revealed that six months prior to this week’s event, his faction had agreed to reconcile with the Juniver Girsang faction with regard to three aspects: formulation of a uniform standard for lawyers, establishment of a single honorary council, and preparations for the establishment of a single institution for the two united factions.
“Should Mr. Kusumanegara agree to such a reconciliation, then we can immediately declare our unification. Now the only question that remains is whether Mr. Kusumanegara will be able to convince his chairman [Fauzie Hasibuan] to declare his support for the plan,” Mr. Santoso asserted.
In spite of this reconciliation plan, Mr. Santoso believes that each PERADI member can actually comply with the mandatory pro-bono work policy at an individual level, provided that a uniform concept is first laid out beforehand. By way of example, Mr. Santoso explained that mandatory pro-bono work can be set as an administrative requirement for any lawyers who are looking to extend their membership of any of the current factions.
“The implementation of such a measure would most likely encourage lawyers to engage in a greater amount of pro-bono work, and we plan to discuss this issue at our next national meeting,” Mr. Santoso stated.
Mr. Santoso also asserted his belief that any attempt at reconciliation would basically depend upon the willingness and good faith of each factional chairman. However, now that Luhut Pangaribuan and Juniver Girsang have already agreed to reunite, Fauzi Hasibuan is the only chairman who ultimately needs to decide whether or not to join forces and commit to the plans set out by the other two factions.
In line with the issue of reconciliation, Wayan Purwita from the Juniver Girsang faction has expressed his regret regarding the PERADI split. Mr. Purwita also stated his belief that effective monitoring was indeed necessary in order for the mandatory pro-bono work regulation to be successfully implemented. Ultimately, Mr. Purwita hopes that lawyers will come to view pro-bono work as an integral part of their lifestyles, instead of being viewed as mere charity work, and for Purwita, PERADI is responsible for the development of such a mindset among its members.
Both alarm and disappointment have been expressed at the lack of pro-bono work undertaken in Indonesia. Indeed, only one law firm in the country currently provides pro-bono services at a structural level, as set out in the Index of Pro Bono 2016 issued by TrustLaw. By way of comparison, at least 15 Singaporean law firms are in listed under the index, with at least 10 hours of pro-bono work being undertaken by at least 30% of Singaporean lawyers each year. According to the TrustLaw survey, an effective monitoring system is behind Singapore’s success here. Singapore’s system requires lawyers to report their pro-bono work as a prerequisite for any licensing applications.
(cd/sp)
Photo by: HAG
Having initially got underway last Monday, the 2016 Asia Pro Bono Forum (APBF) in Bali is about to draw to a close today. During the course of this week, a number of strategic issues regarding pro-bono work across Asia have been addressed, including the implementation of a system of mandatory pro-bono work for Indonesian lawyers, as well as the imposition of administrative sanctions upon lawyers who fail to comply with this obligation.
The authority to impose any such sanctions falls upon the shoulders of the country’s advocate associations, including the Indonesian Advocates Association (PERADI). Unfortunately however, this association is currently divided into three factions, specifically the Juniver Girsang, Fauzie Hasibuan and Luhut Pangaribuan factions. This split has taken its toll and has led to a number of difficulties as regards the monitoring of the implementation of any pro-bono work undertaken by PERADI members, due to uncertainties regarding which faction actually has such oversight authority. Such monitoring is seen as vital however and tracks the progress of all PERADI members who are subject to the mandatory 50-hour pro-bono work per year stipulation, regardless of their factional allegiances.
In a bid to seek a solution, representatives from the three PERADI factions this week declared their willingness to reconcile. According to Rivai Kusumanegara, a representative from the Fauzie Hasibuan faction, the distribution of lawyers is key for successful pro-bono work and requires one unified pool from which to draw .
Mr. Kusumanegara added that PERADI is aiming to implement more concrete measures while waiting for this unification to materialize, such as encouraging lawyers to assist any underprivileged citizens who are in need of legal assistance. With this end in mind, PERADI is currently running a number of free legal-counseling events, which are being supported by 1,000 lawyers drawn from the three factions in question.
“Ideally speaking, the best move would be for the three factions to unite once again under a single PERADI flag in order to reach a greater proportion of the Indonesian population,” Mr. Kusumanegara emphasized.
Representing the Luhut Pangaribuan faction, Sugeng Teguh Santoso showed his appreciation for the Fauzie Hasibuan faction’s desire to reunite and see a successful implementation of the mandatory pro-bono work policy. Mr. Santoso also revealed that six months prior to this week’s event, his faction had agreed to reconcile with the Juniver Girsang faction with regard to three aspects: formulation of a uniform standard for lawyers, establishment of a single honorary council, and preparations for the establishment of a single institution for the two united factions.
“Should Mr. Kusumanegara agree to such a reconciliation, then we can immediately declare our unification. Now the only question that remains is whether Mr. Kusumanegara will be able to convince his chairman [Fauzie Hasibuan] to declare his support for the plan,” Mr. Santoso asserted.
In spite of this reconciliation plan, Mr. Santoso believes that each PERADI member can actually comply with the mandatory pro-bono work policy at an individual level, provided that a uniform concept is first laid out beforehand. By way of example, Mr. Santoso explained that mandatory pro-bono work can be set as an administrative requirement for any lawyers who are looking to extend their membership of any of the current factions.
“The implementation of such a measure would most likely encourage lawyers to engage in a greater amount of pro-bono work, and we plan to discuss this issue at our next national meeting,” Mr. Santoso stated.
Mr. Santoso also asserted his belief that any attempt at reconciliation would basically depend upon the willingness and good faith of each factional chairman. However, now that Luhut Pangaribuan and Juniver Girsang have already agreed to reunite, Fauzi Hasibuan is the only chairman who ultimately needs to decide whether or not to join forces and commit to the plans set out by the other two factions.
In line with the issue of reconciliation, Wayan Purwita from the Juniver Girsang faction has expressed his regret regarding the PERADI split. Mr. Purwita also stated his belief that effective monitoring was indeed necessary in order for the mandatory pro-bono work regulation to be successfully implemented. Ultimately, Mr. Purwita hopes that lawyers will come to view pro-bono work as an integral part of their lifestyles, instead of being viewed as mere charity work, and for Purwita, PERADI is responsible for the development of such a mindset among its members.
Both alarm and disappointment have been expressed at the lack of pro-bono work undertaken in Indonesia. Indeed, only one law firm in the country currently provides pro-bono services at a structural level, as set out in the Index of Pro Bono 2016 issued by TrustLaw. By way of comparison, at least 15 Singaporean law firms are in listed under the index, with at least 10 hours of pro-bono work being undertaken by at least 30% of Singaporean lawyers each year. According to the TrustLaw survey, an effective monitoring system is behind Singapore’s success here. Singapore’s system requires lawyers to report their pro-bono work as a prerequisite for any licensing applications.
(cd/sp)
Marcell Sihombing, Hasyry Agustin
The authority to impose any such sanctions falls upon the shoulders of the country’s advocate associations, including the Indonesian Advocates Association (PERADI). Unfortunately however, this association is currently divided into three factions, specifically the Juniver Girsang, Fauzie Hasibuan and Luhut Pangaribuan factions. This split has taken its toll and has led to a number of difficulties as regards the monitoring of the implementation of any pro-bono work undertaken by PERADI members, due to uncertainties regarding which faction actually has such oversight authority. Such monitoring is seen as vital however and tracks the progress of all PERADI members who are subject to the mandatory 50-hour pro-bono work per year stipulation, regardless of their factional allegiances.
In a bid to seek a solution, representatives from the three PERADI factions this week declared their willingness to reconcile. According to Rivai Kusumanegara, a representative from the Fauzie Hasibuan faction, the distribution of lawyers is key for successful pro-bono work and requires one unified pool from which to draw .
Mr. Kusumanegara added that PERADI is aiming to implement more concrete measures while waiting for this unification to materialize, such as encouraging lawyers to assist any underprivileged citizens who are in need of legal assistance. With this end in mind, PERADI is currently running a number of free legal-counseling events, which are being supported by 1,000 lawyers drawn from the three factions in question.
“Ideally speaking, the best move would be for the three factions to unite once again under a single PERADI flag in order to reach a greater proportion of the Indonesian population,” Mr. Kusumanegara emphasized.
Representing the Luhut Pangaribuan faction, Sugeng Teguh Santoso showed his appreciation for the Fauzie Hasibuan faction’s desire to reunite and see a successful implementation of the mandatory pro-bono work policy. Mr. Santoso also revealed that six months prior to this week’s event, his faction had agreed to reconcile with the Juniver Girsang faction with regard to three aspects: formulation of a uniform standard for lawyers, establishment of a single honorary council, and preparations for the establishment of a single institution for the two united factions.
“Should Mr. Kusumanegara agree to such a reconciliation, then we can immediately declare our unification. Now the only question that remains is whether Mr. Kusumanegara will be able to convince his chairman [Fauzie Hasibuan] to declare his support for the plan,” Mr. Santoso asserted.
In spite of this reconciliation plan, Mr. Santoso believes that each PERADI member can actually comply with the mandatory pro-bono work policy at an individual level, provided that a uniform concept is first laid out beforehand. By way of example, Mr. Santoso explained that mandatory pro-bono work can be set as an administrative requirement for any lawyers who are looking to extend their membership of any of the current factions.
“The implementation of such a measure would most likely encourage lawyers to engage in a greater amount of pro-bono work, and we plan to discuss this issue at our next national meeting,” Mr. Santoso stated.
Mr. Santoso also asserted his belief that any attempt at reconciliation would basically depend upon the willingness and good faith of each factional chairman. However, now that Luhut Pangaribuan and Juniver Girsang have already agreed to reunite, Fauzi Hasibuan is the only chairman who ultimately needs to decide whether or not to join forces and commit to the plans set out by the other two factions.
In line with the issue of reconciliation, Wayan Purwita from the Juniver Girsang faction has expressed his regret regarding the PERADI split. Mr. Purwita also stated his belief that effective monitoring was indeed necessary in order for the mandatory pro-bono work regulation to be successfully implemented. Ultimately, Mr. Purwita hopes that lawyers will come to view pro-bono work as an integral part of their lifestyles, instead of being viewed as mere charity work, and for Purwita, PERADI is responsible for the development of such a mindset among its members.
Both alarm and disappointment have been expressed at the lack of pro-bono work undertaken in Indonesia. Indeed, only one law firm in the country currently provides pro-bono services at a structural level, as set out in the Index of Pro Bono 2016 issued by TrustLaw. By way of comparison, at least 15 Singaporean law firms are in listed under the index, with at least 10 hours of pro-bono work being undertaken by at least 30% of Singaporean lawyers each year. According to the TrustLaw survey, an effective monitoring system is behind Singapore’s success here. Singapore’s system requires lawyers to report their pro-bono work as a prerequisite for any licensing applications.
(cd/sp)
Photo by: HAG
Having initially got underway last Monday, the 2016 Asia Pro Bono Forum (APBF) in Bali is about to draw to a close today. During the course of this week, a number of strategic issues regarding pro-bono work across Asia have been addressed, including the implementation of a system of mandatory pro-bono work for Indonesian lawyers, as well as the imposition of administrative sanctions upon lawyers who fail to comply with this obligation.
The authority to impose any such sanctions falls upon the shoulders of the country’s advocate associations, including the Indonesian Advocates Association (PERADI). Unfortunately however, this association is currently divided into three factions, specifically the Juniver Girsang, Fauzie Hasibuan and Luhut Pangaribuan factions. This split has taken its toll and has led to a number of difficulties as regards the monitoring of the implementation of any pro-bono work undertaken by PERADI members, due to uncertainties regarding which faction actually has such oversight authority. Such monitoring is seen as vital however and tracks the progress of all PERADI members who are subject to the mandatory 50-hour pro-bono work per year stipulation, regardless of their factional allegiances.
In a bid to seek a solution, representatives from the three PERADI factions this week declared their willingness to reconcile. According to Rivai Kusumanegara, a representative from the Fauzie Hasibuan faction, the distribution of lawyers is key for successful pro-bono work and requires one unified pool from which to draw .
Mr. Kusumanegara added that PERADI is aiming to implement more concrete measures while waiting for this unification to materialize, such as encouraging lawyers to assist any underprivileged citizens who are in need of legal assistance. With this end in mind, PERADI is currently running a number of free legal-counseling events, which are being supported by 1,000 lawyers drawn from the three factions in question.
“Ideally speaking, the best move would be for the three factions to unite once again under a single PERADI flag in order to reach a greater proportion of the Indonesian population,” Mr. Kusumanegara emphasized.
Representing the Luhut Pangaribuan faction, Sugeng Teguh Santoso showed his appreciation for the Fauzie Hasibuan faction’s desire to reunite and see a successful implementation of the mandatory pro-bono work policy. Mr. Santoso also revealed that six months prior to this week’s event, his faction had agreed to reconcile with the Juniver Girsang faction with regard to three aspects: formulation of a uniform standard for lawyers, establishment of a single honorary council, and preparations for the establishment of a single institution for the two united factions.
“Should Mr. Kusumanegara agree to such a reconciliation, then we can immediately declare our unification. Now the only question that remains is whether Mr. Kusumanegara will be able to convince his chairman [Fauzie Hasibuan] to declare his support for the plan,” Mr. Santoso asserted.
In spite of this reconciliation plan, Mr. Santoso believes that each PERADI member can actually comply with the mandatory pro-bono work policy at an individual level, provided that a uniform concept is first laid out beforehand. By way of example, Mr. Santoso explained that mandatory pro-bono work can be set as an administrative requirement for any lawyers who are looking to extend their membership of any of the current factions.
“The implementation of such a measure would most likely encourage lawyers to engage in a greater amount of pro-bono work, and we plan to discuss this issue at our next national meeting,” Mr. Santoso stated.
Mr. Santoso also asserted his belief that any attempt at reconciliation would basically depend upon the willingness and good faith of each factional chairman. However, now that Luhut Pangaribuan and Juniver Girsang have already agreed to reunite, Fauzi Hasibuan is the only chairman who ultimately needs to decide whether or not to join forces and commit to the plans set out by the other two factions.
In line with the issue of reconciliation, Wayan Purwita from the Juniver Girsang faction has expressed his regret regarding the PERADI split. Mr. Purwita also stated his belief that effective monitoring was indeed necessary in order for the mandatory pro-bono work regulation to be successfully implemented. Ultimately, Mr. Purwita hopes that lawyers will come to view pro-bono work as an integral part of their lifestyles, instead of being viewed as mere charity work, and for Purwita, PERADI is responsible for the development of such a mindset among its members.
Both alarm and disappointment have been expressed at the lack of pro-bono work undertaken in Indonesia. Indeed, only one law firm in the country currently provides pro-bono services at a structural level, as set out in the Index of Pro Bono 2016 issued by TrustLaw. By way of comparison, at least 15 Singaporean law firms are in listed under the index, with at least 10 hours of pro-bono work being undertaken by at least 30% of Singaporean lawyers each year. According to the TrustLaw survey, an effective monitoring system is behind Singapore’s success here. Singapore’s system requires lawyers to report their pro-bono work as a prerequisite for any licensing applications.
(cd/sp)