 | |
|
The existence of the Charter of the Member Countries of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), which was ratified by Act No. 38/2008, has eliminated the sovereignty of the people as mandated by the Constitution. In other words, provisions in the Charter, particularly Article 1 Paragraph (5) and Article 2 Paragraph (2) letter n, has been ‘liquidated’ the existence of the state. It declared by Sri Edi Swasono as he became an expert in a court case number 33/PUU-IX/2011 Wednesday (20 / 7) in the Plenary session. "Market sovereignty displaces people sovereignty," he said.
According to him, the opinion that free trade will prosper the people is just an illusion. The single market policy or a free market in ASEAN will only marginalize the poor, instead of eliminating poverty. "What happens is that the process of impoverishment and disablement," he said. He stressed that international agreements should be in harmony with the Constitution of 1945. Especially relevant economic, must be in accordance with the mandate of Article 33 of the 1945 Constitution.
On that occasion, the Petitioner did not present only Edy Swasono as an expert. Actually, according to Petitioner, there were seven experts and three witnesses to be presented by his side. However, that may be present at the hearing this time only four experts and two witnesses. For expert, they were Syamsul Hadi, Khudori and Ichsanudin Noorsy. As for witnesses, there were Nurul Hidayati and Surati. Both are batik manufacturer and merchants that are considered to feel the negative impact of the enactment of the free market.
In his statement, Syamsul Hadi also concurred with Edy. According to him, the agreement of ASEAN countries to build an integrated single market, benefiting countries with established economies. The existence of a single market and production base in ASEAN region resulted in competition and competition is not balanced.
In fact, according to him, agreements and agreements contained in the ASEAN Charter is too normative and dreamily. "It represents the interests of grassroots communities in ASEAN," he said while explaining the contribution of the ASEAN Charter in the social and cultural aspects. In fact, ASEAN is difficult to perform concrete actions in solving problems that occur in some ASEAN member countries. "As the coup in Thailand and human rights abuses in Myanmar," he gave an example.
Similarly, Ichsanuddin Noorsy opinionated the agreement to build a free market and the single market in ASEAN is a setting of global economy that embraces neoliberal ideology. And this ideology, it can be said to be contrary to the spirit of pro-people economy is mandated by the Constitution.
In the trial, he did not forget to strengthen his argument by citing the opinion of the Nobel-winning economist and presentation of data from several studies. He had time to challenge the government representatives were present to argue the data and opinion."Ruin this data," he pleaded. Finally, he closed his presentation by asking the judges to consider carefully before verdict. He advised that the Court not only test by using a stone of test articles of the 1945 Constitution, but also the Preamble of the 1945 Constitution.
Meanwhile, Khudori in his presentation highlighted the impact of free trade in ASEAN towards the fate of agriculture in Indonesia. He gives the title of expert testimony, "The Impact of ASEAN Free Trade Agreement on Agriculture in Indonesia". He also concluded, Law 38/2008 should be canceled because it contravenes the 1945 Constitution.
Hard PositionOn the same occasion, the trial was also attended by representatives of the Government. They consisted of three ministries, namely Ministry of Justice and Human Rights, Ministry of Trade, and Ministry of Foreign Affairs. The statement of the Government had delivered by Linggawaty Hakim.
Linggawaty conveyed the ratification of the ASEAN Charter by Law 38/2008 does not automatically make such international agreements as the national norms. "There is no law in Indonesia, including the Constitution which expressly states that the ratification of the treaty into law to transform the provisions of international law as national norms," he said.
In fact, according to him, tying the Charter applies not depend on the Law 38/2008. "(Law 38/2008) is a legal basis to bind the Government of Indonesia to the ASEAN Charter," he said. The impact if the Court granted the petition, Indonesia will result in a hard position. He explained that under international law, national provisions cannot be used to justify a failed state in implementing an international treaty. "Indonesia will still have international legal obligations and be bound by the provisions of the ASEAN Charter," he explained. (Dodi/mh/Yazid.tr)
0 komentar:
Posting Komentar