 | |
|
The Court continued reviewing the Act No. 13/2003 on Manpower on Thursday (14 / 7). Court Registrar had registered the case with Number 37/PUU-IX/2011 filed by three petitioners. They were Ugan Gandar, Eko Wahyu, and Rommel Antonius Ginting.
In the trial of improvement petition, the Petitioners were represented by legal counsel. Petitioners have revised the application in accordance with that suggested by the Council of Panel Judges, chaired by Constitutional Court Justice Anwar Usman and accompanied by Hamdan Zoelva and Akil Mochtar.
In a previous trial, Petitioners argued that their constitutional rights violated due to the enactment of Article 155 Paragraph (2). Article 155 Paragraph (2) states "As long as the decision of an industrial relations dispute settlement body has not been established, employers and workers / laborers shall continue to perform all its obligations".
At the hearing, Petitioner also filed evidence. "Petitioners filed 13 evidences of P-1through P-13. And, one additional evidence, then there are 14 items of evidence. So this evidence was passed, "Usman Anwar said.
In the main petition, the Petitioner judge Article 155 Paragraph (2) contrary to Article28D Paragraph (1) since the implementation in the field, the article raises two interpretations. The first interpretation of 'not specified' means only to the industrial relations court of first instance. There is also a second interpretation to the Supreme Court level. Therefore, in a suit or its petitum, Petitioner requested that the Article 155 paragraph (2) declared unconstitutional conditional (conditionally constitutional)."Throughout the clause 'not defined' in Article 155 paragraph (2) is interpreted to court industrial relations and binding, "Petitioner's attorney said. (Lulu Anjarsari / mh/Yazid.tr)
0 komentar:
Posting Komentar