Rahmat Wibowo announced filing a formal complaint with PERADI's Disciplinary Board against an unnamed attorney, accusing them of ethics violations including failure to protect clients, unsubstantiated legal threats, false statements, and intimidation, with no supporting documentation provided.

Indonesian Advocate Files Formal Complaint Against Colleague for Ethics Breach 3w FORMAL COMPLAINT: BREACH OF ADVOCATES’ CODE OF ETHICS IN INDONESIA am writing to formally announce that | have issued a FORMAL NOTICE and filed a FORMAL COMPLAINT with the Disciplinary Board of PERADI (Indonesian Advocates Association) against an attorney who has committed serious violations of the Indonesian Advocates’ Code of Ethics. Violations Documented: (G Failure to Protect Client - The attorney in question has actively challenged me to prosecute their own client, directly contradicting the fundamental principle that, advocates must protect and defend their clients’ interests. GB unsubstantiated Legal Threats - The attorney used threats of ITE (Information and Electronic Transactions) law violations as an intimidation tool to force a settlement disadvantageous to me, without any legal basis. G False statements & Threats - The attorney claimed to have filed a report with the National Police Headquarters but provided no evidence, which | consider a threat-based intimidation tactic. Failure to Prioritize Amicable Settlement - Instead of seeking dialogue and resolution, the attorney responded with threats and intimidation, escalating the conflict unnecessarily. Legal Basis: Indonesian Advocates’ Code of Ethics (Articles 3, 4, 5, and 7) Law No. 18 of 2003 Concerning Advocates Law No. 1 of 2023 & Law No. 1 of 2024. My Message: The legal profession is a noble calling dedicated to upholding law and justice—not exploiting it as a tool for intimidation. | believe in the rule of law, professional integrity, and ethical standards. The Code of Ethics for Indonesian Advocates is not merely a document; it is a commitment to protecting justice itself. I call upon all true advocates to: ‘© Uphold professional integrity without compromise 'S Genuinely protect and defend clients’ interests © Prioritize amicable settlement and justice © Reject the misuse of the legal profession for intimidation Ihave prepared comprehensive documentation (Formal Notice & Official Complaint) and will pursue this matter through proper legal channels. The Disciplinary Board's investigation will determine appropriate sanctions. Let us protect the integrity of the legal profession together. Machrio Achmad Perhimpunan Advokat Indonesia (PERADI) DPN PERADI Ahmad Fikri Assegaf Andri Senjaya #AdvocacyEthics #Legalintegrity #PERADI #RuleOfLaw #ProfessionalStandards #AccessToJustice To view or add a comment, sign in More Relevant Posts Jared Meade, MPS, APR, .,, MPRCA 2w + Edited The Justice Department's fight with state bar associations is a massive story and a direct warning to the public relations industry. According to recent reporting by The New York Times and Reuters, the DOJ is maneuvering to prevent state bar associations from enforcing professional ethics rules against federal administration attorneys. The DOJ argues that these ethics complaints are being weaponized for partisan reasons. Whether you agree with the DOJ or the state bars, this story highlights the exact fear people have when we talk about professional licensure for PR. When | advocate for enforceable ethics and licensure in our industry, the number one Pushback | hear is: "How do we stop an ethics or licensing board from becoming a political weapon?" This is a valid fear, because if the entities entrusted with upholding ethical practice are hijacked to punish differing political views, they lose public trust and professional authority. But the answer isn’t to abandon standards or to refuse to have the conversation. The answer is to engineer neutrality into the system because ethics MUST rise above political views. If we are going to build structural guardrails in PR, we need to design them to resist weaponization from day one. | don’t pretend to have all the answers on how we might do that, but here are just a few ideas that deserve further thought. @ An ethics or licensing board's jurisdiction should be strictly limited to objective, verifiable action that breaks ethical standards of practice. @ The board's composition should reflect the diverse sectors of PR to help ensure a broad range of perspectives and naturally diversify its ideological makeup. @ Any board should be required to obtain a supermajority for any disciplinary action. @ The responsibility for investigation should be kept separate from adjudication. @ There needs to be a built-in automatic, severe penalty for filing bad-faith, politically motivated complaints designed to tarnish a practitioner's reputation. The conversation about licensing the PR profession shouldn't stall because we're afraid to establish guardrails; it needs to move forward so we can the profession can work together to build guardrails strong enough to withstand hijacking. I would love to hear your thoughts. Article in Comments #PRethics #PublicRelations #PR #Leadership #Accountability #institutionalTrust Te move escalates the administration feud with egal dlsciplinary bodies over the ehial conduct of goverment lawyers. ©@ 3-1. comment To view or add a comment, sign in 2 Frederick S. we 2w Ethics in Industrial Relations isn't just about following the law, it's about the moral quality of the work experience. Atruly meaningful discussion moves beyond contracts and wages to address the "human" side of the desk. University of the Philippines Diliman To view or add a comment, sign in Fiona Ey we aw + Edited Strengthening professional conduct standards and ethics. ‘The Samoa Law Society recently hosted a workshop that featured senior practitioners reflecting honestly on current practices and encouraging a recommitment to our professional standards. Judge Raymond Schuster and Leiataualesa Komisi Koria spoke deeply about what it means to practice law with integrity, humility, and purpose. Judge Schuster challenged us to think of professional ethics with a framework of “purpose, values and significance”. He reminded us that lawyers need to know their purpose and remain impartial and independent. Judge Schuster challenged participants: "we need lawyers to make a difference and give back to their community. A law degree is just a piece of paper; we need to add value to it so it means something.” Leiataualesa reflected on the importance of lawyers continuing to engage with the concept of rule of law - that no person is above the law. He reminded us that as practitioners, the trust placed in us is significant, and that trust must never be taken lightly. We must engage with our professional conduct framework on a daily basis, whether dealing with clients, the courts or other practitioners. It was a reminder that ethics isn’t something we switch on when needed; it's something we carry into every decision, every client interaction, and every courtroom appearance. This initiative reflects the Samoa Law Society's ongoing commitment to building professional capabilities and ethical frameworks. #LegalEthics #SamoaLawSociety #Growth #integrity #LegalProfession ©O@ 62-1 comment To view or add a comment, sign in Association of Corporate ‘c= Counsel Australia 8,839 followers ww - Edited VIC IHCD Session Spotlight In-House Ethics in Action: Applying the New VLSB+C In-House Corporate Lawyer Guidance # Presented by Commissioner Fiona McLeay, Ben Copeland VLSB4C and Sari Baird, moderated by Emily Madder (Siemens Energy) As in-house lawyers navigate increasingly complex business and ethical pressures, this, session will explore the practical application of the new VLSB+C In-House Lawyer Guidance. Commissioner Fiona McLeay, CEO & Commissioner of the Victorian Legal Services Board + Commissioner, will walk attendees through the guidance and the practical resources designed to support ethical decision-making in real-world in-house settings. Following the presentation, an experienced panel of in-house practitioners will discuss common ethical challenges facing corporate counsel today and share practical strategies for balancing commercial realities with professional responsibilities. InterContinental Melbourne ‘F Thursday, 4 June © Register now to secure your spot: #IHCD26 #ACCAustralia #inHouseCounsel #GeneralCounsel #Ethics #ProfessionalResponsibility #CorporateCounsel #inspiringExcellence #influencingOutcomes ik ACC . 2026 corrccivy Thursday. 4 June Fiona McLeay Ben Copeland ©@ 15-1 comment To view or add a comment, sign in Victorian Legal Services uss. Board and Commissioner 8,494 followers EC) We're pleased to join Victorians lawyers working in corporate in-house roles tomorrow for the 2026 In-house Counsel Day hosted by the Association of Corporate Counsel Australia. Our CEO and Commissioner, Fiona McLeay, and General Counsel, Ben Copeland, will be joining Emily Madder, General Counsel and Company Secretary, Siemens Energy, and Sari Baird, Head of Governance, The Fred Hollows Foundation, in a panel session on ‘in-house Ethics in Action’ They'll discuss practical strategies for balancing commercial realities with professional obligations and how to apply our new resources for corporate lawyers. Learn more about the 2026 In-house Counsel Day: View our corporate lawyer resources: Association of Corporate ‘c= Counsel Australia 8,839 followers ww - Edited - VIC IHCD Session Spotlight In-House Ethics in Action: Applying the New VLSB+C In-House Corporate Lawyer Guidance # Presented by Commissioner Fiona McLeay, Ben Copeland VLSB+C and Sari Baird, moderated by Emily Madder (Siemens Energy) As in-house lawyers navigate increasingly complex business and ethical pressures, this session will explore the practical application of the new VLSB+C In-House Lawyer Guidance. Commissioner Fiona McLeay, CEO & Commissioner of the Victorian Legal Services Board + Commissioner, will walk attendees through the guidance and the practical resources designed to support ethical decision-making in real- world in-house settings. Following the presentation, an experienced panel of in-house practitioners will discuss common ethical challenges facing corporate counsel today and share practical strategies for balancing commercial realities with professional responsibilities. InterContinental Melbourne ‘F Thursday, 4 June © Register now to secure your spot: #IHCD26 #ACCAustralia #inHouseCounsel #GeneralCounsel #Ethics #ProfessionalResponsibility #CorporateCounsel #inspiringExcellence #influencingOutcomes — INCE te Panelists 2026 eoorcatoey To view or add a comment, sign in Loquitur 232 followers 6d - Edited Free Cross Examination and Ethics CPD - For all Expert and Professional Witnesses It's fast approaching the end of the financial year, and with that comes the end of the CPD year for some Australian professionals. To assist with this, Loquitur is pleased to provide our online ethics and cross examination CPD, free to all professionals: During this video, titled Expert Witness Cross Examination - Training and Ethics, we discuss: - Some definitions, including witness preparation, evidence preparation and witness training ~ Rules and obligations, and the ethical and strategic tension in expert witness preparation - Some specific pointers for expert witnesses when being cross examined by barristers, and examples of these ~ Categories of "Witness Training’ including mock cross examination, preparation on the substance of an expert's evidence and rehearsal of cross examination based on an expert witness’ report - Considerations for ethical expert witness training - A sample mock cross examination, examples of advocate strategies during cross examination and feedback and analysis of these If you have any questions or would like to see how our various training options may benefit you or your team, please get in touch! #texpertwitness #legal #training #litigation d#auslaw #expertevidence #cpd #education #witness #traininganddevelopment #loquitur #learning #legaltraining To view or add a comment, sign in @> Legal Slice Rae 255 followers aw Anew Justice Department lawsuit is intensifying debate over legal ethics, government accountability, and the independence of professional oversight bodies in the United States. The DOJ is seeking to limit the ability of local bar authorities — including the D.C. Bar — to discipline federal government lawyers for actions taken while serving in office. ‘At the center of the dispute is former Assistant Attorney General Jeff Clark, whose conduct following the 2020 election became the subject of significant ethical scrutiny. The Justice Department argues that allowing state or local regulators to discipline federal officials for actions tied to their government duties could: Interfere with Executive Branch operations Discourage candid legal advice to government leaders ‘W Conflict with constitutional protections under the Supremacy Clause Critics, however, argue the move risks weakening one of the core mechanisms designed to maintain accountability and ethical standards within the legal profession. The case also revives attention around the McDade-Murtha Amendment, which affirms that government attorneys remain subject to state ethics rules and local bar oversight. The broader questions now emerging include: G How should government lawyers be held accountable for professional conduct? can legal independence coexist with political pressure? Gand what role should bar associations play in safeguarding public trust in the legal system? As legal, political, and constitutional tensions continue to intersect, the outcome could have significant implications for professional regulation and executive power in the years ahead. #LegalEthics #JusticeDepartment #RuleOfLaw #CorporateGovernance #USPolitics #LegalProfession #Constitution #Accountability #PublicPolicy #Leadership #Law #Government #CurrentAffairs #Ethics 7] Share To view or add a comment, sign in Shanlon Wu ae ww Federal law already makes clear that DOJ attorneys are subject to ordinary state bar ethics rules. -more > Now, there's another LEMENT CREATE A SLUSH To view or add a comment, sign in Siva Liu ae Lawyers, Speech, and Professional Responsibility While studying legal ethics recently, particularly in a Professional Ethics module and case-based discussions, | found myself reflecting on a recurring question: Do lawyers lose their freedom to express personal views once they enter the profession? The answer, in my view, is more nuanced than a simple yes or no. Lawyers, like all individuals, retain freedom of expression. They are not expected to be silent, detached actors removed from public discourse. On the contrary, legal professionals often contribute meaningfully to debates on justice, governance, and institutional reform. However, legal practice introduces an additional layer of responsibility. Speech is no longer evaluated purely as personal expression, but also through the lens of professional integrity, public confidence in the justice system, and the potential impact on ongoing or past proceedings. This does not eliminate emotion or personal perspective. Rather, it reshapes how such perspectives are expressed. In this sense, legal ethics is not about silencing lawyers, but about balancing two legitimate interests: the individuat’s right to speak, and the profession's duty to preserve trust in the legal system This balance becomes particularly visible in real-world legal practice, where public commentary, professional conduct, and case-related sensitivity often intersect. Interestingly, this idea also connects back to broader legal reasoning we see in cases such as the Corfu Channel Case, where legal responsibility is assessed not only through direct evidence, but also through inferred knowledge and contextual judgment. in both law and professional ethics, context matters as much as content. Ultimately, legal professionalism does not require silence. It requires awareness of consequence. #LegalEthics #Lawyers #ProfessionalResponsibility #FreedomOfExpression #LegalProfession #tJudicialintegrity #internationalLaw #CorfuChannelCase #LegalReasoning