Failed in Regional Election, Salim Alkatiri Reviewed the Act on Court

Decision of the Constitutional Court (MK) which shall be final and binding (final and binding) was tested in the trial Court, Thursday (13/10/2011). Judicial review of Article 10 paragraph (1) of Act 8 / 2011 on the Constitutional Court was filed by Salim Alkatiri, a doctor on the island of Buru and expert staff in the Government of South Hulu regency, Maluku Province.

Article 10 paragraph (1) of Act 8 / 2011 the Constitutional Court Law reads: "The Constitutional Court has the authority to hear at the first and last decision is final for: a. test the laws against the Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia Year 1945; b. deciding authority dispute of state institutions whose authorities are granted by the Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia Year 1945; c. decide upon the dissolution of political parties; and d. decide upon disputes on general election results "

The article was, according to Salim, is contradictory to Article 28I Paragraph (2), and Article 27 Paragraph (1) of the 1945 Constitution. Salim argues, the Constitutional Court’s decision is final closing to take legal chances another. Salim considers the final decisions involve discrimination. He compares with the decision of the Supreme Court (MA), terraced starts from the District Court, Court of Appeal and Cassation at the Supreme Court. In addition there are legal remedies Review (PK). "This is discriminatory. Two of these agencies is the same agency. Why there is one, there is a review, reconsideration no? " said Salim.

Final decision of the Constitutional Court made him failed to follow the Election District of South Buru. Salim partner, La Ode Badwi Alkatiri does not pass verification, among others, because Salim had been sentenced for two years in prison for a crime of corruption of which the penalty over five years based on court decisions that have been legally enforceable.

Case Number 69/PUU-IX/2011 preliminary hearing was conducted by the Panel of Constitutional Justices Anwar Usman, as Chairman, accompanied by Sodiki and Muhammad Alim. Responding to the petition Salim, Ahmad Sodiki stated, the Court authority to hear the first and last, the final decision to test the law, is the sound of Article 24C Paragraph (1) of the 1945 Constitution. "Court is not authorized to change the Constitution, a change that is the MPR. So, should the proposal was presented at the Assembly. Article 24C Paragraph (1) it must be changed in accordance with the contents of the petition, "advises Sodiki. (Rosihin Nur Ana / mh/Yazid.tr)

Read more »

Expert Applicant: Ambiguity of Act on Narcotics

Act 35/2009 on Narcotics contains the definition of ambiguous regarding drug abuse. It was stated by Asmin Fransisca when Petitioner was asked as expert in the plenary judicial Narcotics Law (Case Number 48/PUU-IX/2011) Thursday (09/22/2011) at the plenary chamber of the Constitutional Court.

Lecturer Faculty of Law, Atma Jaya and Indonesian Coordinating Coalition for Drug Policy Reform (ICDPR) This article mentions the three definitions of matter in which he confused the Narcotics Act, namely the definition of Article 1, item 13, Article 1 number 15, and the Explanation of Article 54.

"The confusion occurs in Article 1 number 13 and 15 in this Act may be abusers of narcotic addicts and drug users with a variety of factors, potentially very large to be abusers as well. Though these two definitions have different consequences, namely the first is the rehabilitation, while the other is the definition of punishment in prison, "explained Frances.

This confusion, Frances continued to complicate the practice of law enforcement, particularly police and prosecutors. Ambiguity of this definition makes legal certainty for addicts and abusers is not guaranteed, when the law enforcers to implement a single criminal prosecution article, namely Article 112 which explains about the ownership, control of narcotics without rights or against the law.

Confusing

Narcotics Act material, according to Frances was quite confusing. On one side of the abusers and addicts have a right to health and social services through the rehabilitation process which will be determined by a judge later. However, on the other hand, they are potentially huge for the convicted and lose the right to rehabilitation services.

Whereas in the Narcotics Act Article 127 Article 127 expressly provides that judges shall take into account the provision of rehabilitation in accordance with Article 54, Article 55 and Article 103 for abusers. "This means, the nuances of the right to health, health services, adequate attention through this legislation," said Frances.

In contrast to Article 112 of the Narcotics Act governing people without rights and unlawfully possess, store, and control the supply of narcotics, which closes the possibility of our users or addicts in which a breach of Article 112 for direct access to rehabilitation services program. But in practice, from various literature studies have been conducted, many law enforcement agencies use these two chapters in the file examination simultaneously. Article 112 is also a chapter that is widely used for anyone, that is for addicts, abusers, or dealers, as well as narcotics producer.

This has led to confusion in law enforcement and creates a position between addicts and drug users, victims of drug abuse, with manufacturers and distributor are the same. "The action and effect the crime is very different. In Article 112, there are criminal penalties and fines are high enough that very expensive. Quite strange if criminal sanctions are high and very expensive fines imposed on addicts or abusers, "said Frances postulated.

The weakening of the Court authority

On the same occasion, the Court Case Number 49/PUU-IX/2011 also hear about the judicial Law 8 / 2011 on Amendments to Law 24/2003 on the Constitutional Court (Law Court). Former Constitutional Court Justice, who was asked as an applicant, wants a strengthening of the Constitutional Court Law. However, the opposite is true, that is weakening. It is strengthening it in order to allow checks and balances. "Changes made should be the actual empowerment of state institutions to perform their functions within the mechanism of checks and balances," said Maruarar Siahaan as usually called Maru.

Furthermore Maru said, the authority of state institutions provided for in the 1945 and then made arrangements so that further weakened the norm of law, is a separate constitutional issue. "How could a delegated authority from the constitution formulated re-formulated so it does not fit with the spirit of the constitution itself," the proposition Maru.

To note, on (05/08/2011) and the Court held a preliminary hearing for the two cases mentioned above. Mohammed Zainal Arifin, Petitioner’s attorney argues case Number 48/PUU-IX/2011 Article 45A and Article 57 paragraph (2) letter a and c of the Constitutional Court ruling to close the space of ultra petita (giving the decision beyond what the Petitioners filed). The provision is detrimental to Petitioner’s constitutional rights, because the likely effect on the Constitutional Court did not grant the application for judicial review filed by the Petitioner Narcotics Act. (Nur Rosihin Ana / mh/Yazid.tr)

Mahkamah Konstitusi 

Read more »

Constitutional Court: Rights and Obligations of Employers-Workers Quit after Layoffs Verdict Inkracht

Mechanism of termination of employment (FLE) has been regulated in Act 13/2003 on Manpower and Act 2 / 2004 concerning Industrial Relations Disputes Settlement (PPHI). Article 151 of Act on Manpower asserts, workers and employers should make every effort to avoid layoffs. If layoffs are unavoidable, then the workers and employers must meet to seek agreement. But if no agreement is reached, layoffs can only be done after a determination of the dispute settlement institutions of industrial relations. 

Similarly, the Court’s opinion in the court pronounced the verdict Case Number 37/PUU-IX/2011, Monday (09/19/2011) housed in the courtroom Plenary Court Building. Application for judicial review was filed by Ugan Gandar, President of the Federation of Trade Unions Unite Pertamina (FSPPB), Eko Wahyu Secretary-General (FSPPB), and Rommel Antonius Ginting. The constitutionality of the applicant testing this phrase "not defined" in Article 155 paragraph (2) which states, "During the dispute settlement ruling institutions of industrial relations has not been established, both employers and workers / laborers shall continue to perform all its obligations" According to the Petitioners, the phrase is contradictory to Article 28D Paragraph (1) and Paragraph (2) of the 1945 Constitution. 

In the ruling, the Court granted the petition of the Petitioner. Court stated the phrase "not defined" in Article 155 paragraph (2) of Act 13/2003 on Manpower against the 1945 Constitution to the extent not understood yet binding. 

Court argued, layoffs are carried out without the approval of an industrial relations dispute settlement institutions become null and void [vide Article 155 paragraph (1) of Law 13/2003]. During the industrial relations dispute settlement institutions are still examining the process of layoffs, workers and employers should continue to perform the duties and obligations of each as provided for in Article 155 paragraph (2) of Act 13/2003. 

When the dispute submitted to the Industrial Relations Court as provided for in Article 24 of Law 2 / 2004, then the dispute shall be deemed not final and binding until a court decision and binding. If the phrase "not defined" in Article 155 paragraph (2) of Act 13/2003 is associated with an industrial relations dispute settlement mechanism, then there is the potential for legal uncertainty for the parties about the meaning of the phrase "not defined" in Article 155 paragraph (2) of Law 13 / 2003. 

On the other hand, Article 28D paragraph (1) and paragraph (2) of the 1945 Constitution has determined: "(1) Everyone has the right to recognition, guarantees, protection and legal certainty of fair and equal treatment before the law, (2) Every person has the right to work and receive remuneration and fair and decent treatment in labor relations. " 

Under the provisions of Article 28D paragraph (1) and paragraph (2) of the 1945 Constitution, according to the Court, there should be a definite interpretation associated the phrase "not defined" in Article 155 paragraph (2) of Law 13/2003, so there is a fair legal certainty in implementation of these phrases, so the parties can obtain guarantees and legal certainty against the acquisition of their rights in the event of industrial disputes. 

According to the Court, the phrase "not defined" in Article 155 paragraph (2) of Law 13/2003 must be interpreted court decisions that have permanent legal force for the decision of the Industrial Relations Court one can directly obtain permanent legal force in the first instance by the Industrial Relations Court, namely decision regarding conflicts of interest, the decision regarding disputes between unions / workers in one company, as well as decisions regarding disputes and layoffs that are not filed an appeal. The decision regarding the dispute and the rights of appeal filed dismissals have to wait for the decision of the Supreme Court first new permanent legal force. Court’s opinion, the petition of the petition is proved and justified by law. (Nur Rosihin Ana / mh/Yazid.tr)

http://www.mahkamahkonstitusi.go.id/index.php?page=website_eng.BeritaInternalLengkap&id=5884

Read more »

Court Rejects Banjarnegara District Election Dispute

Application of Dispute over Regional Head Election of Banjarnegara Regency, Central Java, the proposed pair Budhi Sarwono-Kusuma Winahyu Diah AT, rejected the Constitutional Court (MK). "Rejecting the petition in its entirety," said Chairman of the Plenary Assembly of the Constitutional Court, Moh. Mahfud MD. The agenda of the plenary session is reading the verdict on Tuesday (8/23/2011) on l 2 plenum chamber of the Constitutional Court building.

Budhi Sarwono-Kusuma Winahyu Diah A.T. a pair of candidates Regent / Vice Regent Banjarnegara Year 2011 with serial number 2. Couples who depart from the path of individual (independent) is occupying the second place votes, under the acquisition-mate Sutedjo Slamet Utomo-Hadi Supeno.

Following the vote Banjarnegara district level for each candidate based on the recapitulation of votes assigned Banjarnegara District Election Commission (KPU) Banjarnegara District: Pair Syamsudin -Toto Hardono (number 1) to obtain 105,313, the Budhi Sarwono-Kusuma Winahyu Diah AT (Numbered 2) 170 076 votes, the couple M. Yusrie, M. Najib (numbered 3) 23 007 votes, and the last couple Sutedjo Slamet Utomo-Hadi Supeno (numbered 4) 199 065 votes.

Pair Budhi Sarwono-Kusuma Winahyu Diah AT filed an objection to the Court against such recapitulation. The couple argues, established the Commission Banjarnegara recapitulation generated from the process that is not true, because it marked a number of offenses involving fraud and election organizers, the bureaucracy, the head of the village, and village. Fraud and abuse, according to Budhi Sarwono-Kusuma Winahyu Diah AT, made before, during and after implementation of the ballot on July 24, 2011.

Budhi Sarwono-Kusuma Winahyu Diah AT claims to get 310,791 votes. This acquisition is based on the amount of support by name by address set forth in the form of book support which is taken from real data collection District Coordinator (Korcam) and Coordinator of the Village (Kordes) and Coordinator of polling stations, spread across 20 districts.

After looking at the evidence presented by the parties, according to the Court, its rightful share of the vote in the general election is when voters actually vote. Meanwhile, support to independent candidates who have not legitimately use their voting rights, can not be the basis of vote of Budhi Sarwono-Kusuma Winahyu Diah AT.

As for the number of fraud and breach-as argued by Budhi Sarwono-Kusuma Winahyu Diah AT, the Court argued, did not prove to be a structured, systematic, and massive that significantly affect the vote Budhi Sarwono-Kusuma Winahyu Diah AT that exceeds the vote-pair Sutedjo Slamet Utomo-Hadi Supeno. Therefore, according to the Court, the argument was not proven according to law. (Nur Rosihin Ana / mh/Yazid.tr)

http://www.mahkamahkonstitusi.go.id/index.php?page=website_eng.BeritaInternalLengkap&id=5770

Read more »

Chief of Resort Police of Pati Presented Election Process’ Security

Dispute over Regional Head Election of District Pati entered the stage to hear witness testimony in the hearing of the Constitutional Court (MK), Thursday (08/11/2011) afternoon. On the front panel of the Constitutional Court chaired by Achmad Sodiki and accompanied by Panel Members Ahmad Fadlil Sumadi and Harjono, Chief of Police describe the process of securing Election Pati based on operations Mina Tani Tata Praja.

Police fielded 489 personnel to secure for each phase of the General Election. "Until now, the implementation process of the elections conducted by the police in a safe state," said Chief of Police. Nevertheless, he continued, the institute received four reports of counterfeit stamp Election complaint, unpleasant acts, abuse of academic titles and the last of destruction in the district Wedarijaksa.

Police also denied the existence of the KPU office siege Starch as a description of Thunder, the witness spouse Imam Suroso-Sujoko (Applicant case Number 82/PHPU.D-IX/2011). "No one besieged Commission office. This means that we sterilize the KPU office in order to avoid intervention so that the Commission has the independence, "he explained.

Further Members of the Panel Harjono confronts police chief information with the description of Thunder. According to Guntur, on May 19, the Election Commission Office located in the complex Stadium Joyokusumo, thousands of supporters surrounded the couple Sunarwi-Tejo Pramono. "On 19, at 18:30 we were willing to hand over the files necessary administrative candidates," said Thunder. Guntur also explains the existence of noise and deprivation brought about by Sujoko file in the Office of the Commission Pati.

Harjono again asked Police Chief Starch-related action the Commission Office Starch siege by thousands of supporters Sunarwi-Tejo. "If thousands, Your Honor, baseball possible," said Police Chief Starch that time of the incident claimed to be the KPU Starch. "If it is not possible, you see a lot of baseball there mass?" said Harjono. "There’s masses, but more police, your honor," said Police Chief of Pati.

The judge panel also provides the opportunity for prospective vice-regent Sujoko communicated. According to Sujoko, on May 11, after a complete nomination file, search for Chairman of DPC PDIP Sujoko, Sunarwi, and Secretary of the DPC PDIP. However, Sunarwi continue to dodge the grounds were away pilgrimage. "I continue to be avoided, Mr. Narwi went outside," said Sujoko. Then, he continued, the morning of May 17, Sujoko neighbor went to the house, Endro Jatmiko who are members of the Commission to ask for an explanation exposures Starch authority to enter a file that can only be done by the Chairman and the Secretary of DPC PDIP Starch. "I came not ask for an explanation why this should be the chairman and the secretary to enter a file? Wong I was vice-chairman, "he explained. The news he can from his wife stating Endro Endro had gone to the KPU. "Why is a red date to the Commission why?" Sujoko joked.

Authority Chairman and the Secretary of DPC

Meanwhile, KPU chairman Pati Nursastro Salomo in his reply stated, on May 17, the Commission received a replacement pair of Sunarwi carried by PDIP, which initially brought the couple Imam Suroso-Sujoko, change into the pair of Sunarwi-Tejo.

"Is it enough that the recommendations of the DPC alone, or should the DPP, according to who you know," asked the Panel Members Ahmad Fadlil Sumadi. "No recommendation, Your Honor. The one candidate replacement letter of submission, "said Nursastro. In addition, the added Nursastro, the recommendation is not required under the rule of law.

Strengthening the Commission answers Pati, Central Java Provincial Election Commission declared, authorized repair, equip, or propose a new candidate pair are leaders of political parties. The definition of political party leaders according to regulations of Article 59 paragraph (1) letter a mention, leaders of political parties is the chairman and secretary of the political party nomination at the local level. "So who has the right to nominate, including repairing and propose a new candidate pair is the chairman and secretary of the DPC of each political party," explained the Commission of Central Java.

Then associated with the recommendation, he added, there is not one article was in the laws and regulations the Commission stated that the recommendation is a requirement that must be submitted to the KPU. "So there is a recommendation or no recommendation that a political party’s internal problem," said the Election Commission of Central Java. (Nur Rosihin Ana / mh/Yazid.tr)

http://www.mahkamahkonstitusi.go.id/index.php?page=website_eng.BeritaInternalLengkap&id=5709

Read more »

Pati Election Commission Denied disqualifying PDIP Candidate

Disputes Election Results of the Regional Head Election of Pati regency, Central Java, was held again in the trial in the Constitutional Court (MK), Tuesday (08/09/2011). Hearings conducted by the Panel of Judges chaired by Achmad Sodiki, accompanied by Ahmad Fadil Sumadi and Harjono, scheduled to hear the answer to the Respondent of the General Elections Commission (KPU) of Pati District, heard the testimonies of the Related Party, and Evidence.

Responding to the request Slamet Warsito-Srimulyani (Applicant case Number 81/PHPU.D-IX/2011), Pati Commission through its legal counsel, Umar Ma’ruf in his exception plead obscure (obscuur libel). "In the petition, the Petitioner does not refer to problems associated with its pure PHPU. Postulated is related to the violations that are structural problems, systematic, and massive, "said Umar.

Umar also break proposition of Slamet Warsito-Srimulyani petition on the issue of the minutes of the recapitulation of the results of Election. Starch Commission has done his duty is to give a recap of the minutes of the five pairs of candidates who attended. "Petitioner is present at the recapitulation, but then not finished already out. So of course we can not provide. Then we came to the witness stand than the Applicant. Applicants and witnesses are not willing to accept the minutes of this recapitulation, "added Omar.

In addition, the Commission also denied the argument of Slamet- Warsito-Srimulyani quick count conducted on KPU Pati. "What we do is temporary calculations. And while we do the calculation for 83% of polling stations, instead of 100%, "said Umar.

Then, issues related to polling stations in the yard the village chief, Omar explains the absence of prohibition in this regard. "The existing prohibition as PKPU No. 72 of 2009 is a place of worship, including the pages is not justifiable to use as polling stations," said Umar. Starch Commission also confirmed not aware of any mobilization of civil servants and the use of State facilities. He said he pleaded not get clarification from Election Supervisory Committee of Pati.

Internal problems of PDIP

In the same occasion the Commission of Pati also want to respond to the request of Imam Suroso-Sujoko (Applicant case Number 82/PHPU.D-IX/2011). KPU Pati insisted was never going to make a disqualification or abort candidates Imam Suroso-Sujoko. Commission recognizes the Imam Suroso-Sujoko is going to candidates who have proposed and registered by the DPC PDIP Starch at the time of registration dated May 5, 2011.

Then by the DPC PDIP during repair, replacement with new candidates filed. This new replacement candidates in accordance with the provisions of Article 60 paragraph (3) of Law Number 12 Year 2008. "So it must be understood PDI-P is an internal issue, not a question of the relationship between the Petitioner and the Regency of Pati," said Umar.

Next Umar Ma’ruf, attorney KPU Pati detailed their verification stage chronology of Imam Suroso-Sujoko pair. On May 11, 2011, Umar said, there are messengers from the candidate pairs will be present to the Commission, which will complete the files. "But because it is not on time, then we can not accept," said Umar.

"Because the present is the Chairman and Secretary of the DPC PDIP Pati District then that we received the replacement candidate, and this also in the framework of the precautionary principle we consulted the Central Election Commission, and the Central Election Commission declared, meet the provisions in this law , so we implement this, "said Umar. (Nur Rosihin Ana / mh/Yazid.tr)

http://www.mahkamahkonstitusi.go.id/index.php?page=website_eng.BeritaInternalLengkap&id=5693

Read more »

Divorce Terms Potential Abused

Jucicial review the constitutionality of the material Act 1 / 1974 on Marriage filed Agustina Halimah binti Abdullah Kamil, re-tried in the Constitutional Court (MK), Tuesday (09/08/2011). The trial for case No. 38/PUU-IX/2011 heard expert testimony.

In the presence of nine Constitutional Court Justices headed by Moh. Mahfud MD, the power of the Government, H. Sincerely declares, in the language of religious marriage is called mitsâqan ghalîzhan is a strong agreement, to justify the unlawful and makes worship. Marriage is intended to establish a family life is eternal, whole, harmonious, happy, and prosperous. And is a form of servitude to Allah SWT.

"For that, the marriage is necessary to mutual understanding, understanding, awareness to build a family that sakinah, mawaddah, wa Rahmah," Sincere said the Government read the written statement.

Last road

Marriage Law, in case the arrangement of a marriage breakup, according to the government, has given signs that sufficient to provide a way out for the husband and wife if they are not able to maintain a harmonious household. Article 39 paragraph (1) Marriage Law which states, "Divorce can only be done in front of the courtroom after a court in question tried and failed to reconcile the two sides."

"This provision suggests that divorce is a last resort that should be taken if both parties can not maintain the integrity of the household," said Sincere.

According to the Government, divorce cases that occurred between the Applicant (Halimah bint Abdullah Agustina Kamil) with her husband (HM Soeharto’s son Bambang Trihatmodjo) is related to the implementation of law enforcement practices undertaken by law enforcement, in this case to the Court of Justice and Religious Affairs is not an issue of constitutionality provisions petitioned for review them.

Based on the explanation, the Government asked the Court to reject the petition Halimah. "Rejecting the petition entirely," pleaded Sincere.

Potential Abused

On the same occasion, Halimah who represented his legal counsel, Chairunnisa Jafizham and Laica Marzuki, presented three experts, namely Bismar Siregar, Marzuki Darusman, and Makarim Wibisono. Bismar Siregar, said in his statement, the divorce between the Halimah Bambang Tri Suharto after a few tens of years they foster domestic life, raising questions. Because the petition Cassation Bambang examined and tried by the Supreme Court Judge who stated that the relationship between the Halimah Bambang incompatible with the harmony. Therefore, Bambang has the right to drop the divorce.

Meanwhile, Marzuki Darusman said, the explanation of Article 39 paragraph (2) f of Marriage Act has the potential to be abused. "The problem that may arise among them, is primarily a result of the wrongdoing of the parties, in general, men in relationships with third parties that can not be accepted by the other party, usually the woman. In practice, the situation is what led to the elucidation of Article 39 paragraph (2) f of more harmful to women and lead to women’s rights as human rights become vulnerable, "said Marzuki.

In line with Marzuki, experts Makarim Wibisono applicant states, the explanation of Article 39 paragraph (2) f is detrimental to women and wives for not giving justice to him and reflects the lack of equal rights for women with the rights of husbands and wives. The husband can easily divorce his wife by reason of continuous disputes and quarrels.

"Because that provision did not request or require clarification of who causes, who the trigger, or what was to become prime clauses. This is unfair, anyone women or wives who build the basis of noble households, derived from a sense of love and affection will not be able to receive if her husband’s affair and had an affair with another woman (WIL), "said Makarim . (Nur Rosihin Ana / mh/Yazid.tr)

http://www.mahkamahkonstitusi.go.id/index.php?page=website_eng.BeritaInternalLengkap&id=5689

Read more »

Slamet -Srimulyani and Imam-Sujoko Asked for the General Election of Pati Regency to be Repeated

Regional Head Election of Pati regency, Central Java, which was held on July 24/2011 and then, leaving a cross dispute. One of the six candidates who competed in the General Election Starch and one pair of prospective candidates who did not pass the verification appealed to the Constitutional Court (MK) because it is not satisfied with the Election Starch. Both the candidates Slamet Warsito-Srimulyani and prospective partner Imam Suroso-Sujoko.
Responding to request a second pair of this pair, the Court held a session of the General Election dispute Starch, on Monday (08/08/2011). Preliminary hearing was conducted by a Panel consisting of Harjono as Chairman of the Panel, accompanied by the Member Panel and Anwar Usman Ahmad Fadlil.
Nazrul Ichsan Nasution, the attorney Slamet Warsito-Srimulyani (case Number 81/PHPU.D-IX/2011 Applicant) before the Constitutional Court Panel Respondent expressed an objection to the General Elections Commission (KPU) Pati District has issued a determination that the prospective partner and vice-regent Regent Election Second Round participants.
Pati Commission considers unprofessional carry out their duties because they do not obey the principle of the General Election. "We as a candidate, never given either in the form of any decision," said Nazrul. For example, Nazrul said, his sides never know the contents of the form DB. "Then the decision of the serial number, designation candidates are never at all we received," he added.
In addition, Nazrul also expose a number of arguments violations. Include a polling station in the village chief’s house, the practice of money politics, the mobilization of government officers and honorary workers, as well as the use of state facilities.
Therefore, in the main petition (petition), pair Slamet Warsito-Srimulyani asked the Court to cancel the Minutes of the Commission Starch Number 45/BA/KPU/VIII/2011 dated July 26, 2011 about General Election Vote Count Summary Results Starch. Then declare the Commission Decision on the establishment candidate Starch participants Election Second Round Starch is illegal and null and void. Slamet Warsito-Srimulyani also asked the Court ordered the Election Commission to disqualify the couple Sunarwi-Tejo Pramono and partner Haryanto-Budiono and implement re-polling in the entire region Pati regency.

Claims Recommended by PDIP
The applicant couples Imam Suroso-Sujoko (Applicant case Number 82/PHPU.D-IX/2011) through its legal counsel, arteria Dahlan asserted the recommendation of the DPP PDIP as the bearer party partner Imam Suroso-Sujoko. "The recommendation was apparently addressed to Imam Suroso and Sujoko by the Democratic Party of Struggle," said artery at the beginning of his statement.
Arteria said Sunarwi who was still chairman of DPC PDIP Pati, joint secretary of DPC PDIP Starch, Irianto, and Vice Chairman of the DPD PDIP, register pair pair Imam Suroso-Sujoko to KPU Pati. At once, Sunarwi expressed support to the Imam Suroso-Sujoko.
However, the decision of the Commission set a candidate carried by PDIP is Sunarwi-Tejo Pramono. "Apparently, your Majesty, it published Decree 40 which states, Imam Suroso should not take part, the one to take part is Narwi," continued Arteria.
"So, then who later participated in the General Election on behalf of the PDI-P" asked the Chairman of the Panel Harjono. "Sunarwi is the one on behalf of Democratic Party of Struggle," replied Arteria.
In the main petition, pair Imam Suroso-Sujoko asked the Court to cancel the determination of Pati Election Candidate’s spouse. Then, disqualify Sunarwi-Tejo Pramono and declared Imam Suroso-Sujoko as a couple candidates for the General Election of Pati. Lastly, petitioner asked the Court ordered the Election Commission to hold a reelection. (Nur Rosihin Ana/Yazid.tr)

http://www.mahkamahkonstitusi.go.id/index.php?page=website_eng.BeritaInternalLengkap&id=5683

Read more »

Reviewing Act of Cooperative: Petition of the Petitioners Denied

Principal Petitioner Abdullah Sani and Husien Djunaidi after hearing the reading Decision of the case number 32/PUU-IX/2011 on reviewing Act No. 25 of 1992 concerning Cooperatives [Article 20 Paragraph (1) letter a and Article 37], on Thursday (28/7)

The Case No. 32/PUU-IX/2011 on reviewing Act no. 25 of 1992 concerning Cooperatives reviewed by Muhammad Suryani, Sani Abdullah, Husien Djunaidi, and Badriah. It rejected by the Constitutional Court (MK) in the Plenary Session on Thursday (28 / 7).

In the petition, the Petitioners filed the reviewing of two articles in the Act No. 25/1995 on Cooperatives of Article 20 paragraph (1) letter a and Article 37. Article 20 paragraphs (1) a letter stating, “Every member has the obligation: a. comply with the Statutes and Bylaws and the decisions that have been agreed in the Meeting of Members.”

Article 37 states, “Approval of the annual report, including the ratification of the annual calculation, an acceptance of accountability by the Executive Board Meeting of Members.” The article according to the Petitioners violated Article 27 paragraph (1), Article 28C Paragraph (2), and Article 28D subsections (1) of the 1945 Constitution.

Against the Petitioners’ argument regarding judicial review of Article 20 paragraph (1) letter a of Act 25/1992 which according to the Petitioners violated Article 27 paragraph (1), Article 28C Paragraph (2), and Article 28D Paragraph (1) of the 1945 Constitution, the Court believes that Article 27 paragraph (1) of the 1945 Constitution, which regulates the equality of all citizens before the law and government and an obligation to uphold the law and the government without any exception, not contrary to Article 27 paragraph (1) of the 1945 Constitution because the board is also members of the cooperative that has the same duties with other members. The Court did not find any relevance of Article 20 paragraph (1) letter a of Act 25/1992 to Article 28C Paragraph (2) of the 1945 Constitution, so it is not relevant for consideration.

As to Petitioners’ argument that Article 20 paragraph (1) letter a of Act 25/1992 is contradictory to Article 28D paragraph (1), 1945, the Court considered that also did not reveal any differences of interpretation that give rise to a fair legal uncertainty with respect to Article 20 paragraph (1) letter a of the Act 25/1992, as both members and administrators are equally obliged to obey the constitution / or decisions that have been agreed.

In the case of the review of Article 37 of Act 25/1992 which according to the Petitioners violated Article 27 paragraph (1), Article 28C Paragraph (2), and Article 28D Paragraph (1) of the 1945 Constitution because it seems to give legal privileges and immunities of officials cooperative, the Court argued that Article 37 of the Act is to regulate the mechanisms of accountability to all members of the cooperative board, which, if liability is accepted by the meeting of board members freed from its responsibility of the relevant financial year.

This, according to the Court, is a logical consequence of the accountability mechanisms that have been agreed and contained in the AD / ART, because meeting the members holds the highest authority in the cooperative. If it turns out there were criminal acts committed by officials / administrators, acceptance of accountability does not lead to the abolishment of criminal liability administrators / officials concerned. Thus, according to the Court, the Petitioners’ argument that Article 37 of Act 25/1992 is contradictory to Article 27 paragraph (1), Article 28C Paragraph (2), and Article 28D paragraph (1) of the 1945 Constitution is groundless under law. Based on these considerations, “the Court rejected the petition in its entirety,” said Mahfud MD. (Shohibul Umam/mh/Yazid.tr)

http://www.mahkamahkonstitusi.go.id/index.php?page=website_eng.BeritaInternalLengkap&id=5620

Read more »

Court Rejects Request the Deputy Chairman of the Parliament Kupang

Principal Petitioner, Anthon Melkianus Natun as Vice Chairman of the Parliament in Kupang district on reviewing Act No. 27/2009 on MPR, DPR, DPD and DPRD [Article 354 paragraph (2)]. In its verdict the court rejected the petition in its entirety because the petition is groundless arguments according to law, on Thursday (28 / 7)

Petition filed by the Vice Chairman of Regency Kupang Melkianus Natun Anthon stated rejected for entirely by the Constitutional Court (MK). The reading of the verdict was read by the Chairman of the Constitutional Court, Moh. Mahfud MD, assisted by eight judges constitution on Thursday (28 / 7), at the Plenary Court Room.

“Declare the Provisions, rejected the request provisional petition. In the Basic Petition, Rejecting the petition in its entirety, “said Mahfud when reading Decision No. 21/PUU-IX/2011 read it.

In the main petition, Petitioner argues that Article 354 paragraph (2) of Law 27/2009 are multiple interpretations that conflict with the principle of legal certainty and non-retroactive principle (prohibition of retroactive effect) and does not meet the principles of the formation of legislation. Court’s opinion read by Judge Ahmad Fadlil Sumadi states that Article 354 paragraph (2) of Act 27/2009 which stipulates that Parliament leaders from political parties in order of acquisition of seats in the regency / city, according to the Court’s intention is clear and light, can not be interpreted other.

“The Court considered that the provision did not violate the principle of legal certainty of fair and equal treatment before the law for the leadership of Parliament who has been designated as a leader who later due to the creation of the aspirations of the people are sovereign, should end his tenure as leader because of the order of seats of political parties being reduced. Legal certainty of the rules lies precisely on the proviso that if the sequence number of seats changed political party in connection with the regional division of the sovereign people’s aspirations, then the composition of the leadership positions should also change, “explained Fadlil.

The provisions of Article 354 paragraph (2) of Law 27/2009 is precisely in accordance with fair legal certainty, as well as equal treatment before the law. A quo provision, continued Fadlil mentioned that political parties before the regional division chair the order of acquisition is less than any other political party but then because of the acquisition sequence of area chair be more entitled to occupy leadership positions Parliament. ”Political parties are the order of acquisition Instead chair to be reduced and no longer had ranks the highest number of seats should be removed from office the leadership of Parliament. It is also consistent with the provisions of Article 28D paragraph (3) of the 1945 Constitution which gives every citizen equal opportunity in government, “he explained.

Meanwhile, the Petitioners’ argument that Article 354 paragraph (2) of Law 27/2009 is contradictory to Article 28I paragraph (1) of the 1945 Constitution which is a human right that can not be reduced under any circumstances, especially the right not to be prosecuted on the basis of applicable law subsided. According to the Court as expressed by Muhammad Alim, in the case of dismissal of the previous parliament leader because of majority of seats for regional expansion, the meaning of the words “not prosecuted on the basis of a retroactive law” is an absolute force in the field of criminal law because it contrary to the principle of legality. ”As for the relationship with the petition, the dismissal from office, not prosecuted on the basis of a retroactive law, but by changing the order of seats Political Parties petition because of the displacement seat parliament seats Political Parties Political Parties petition so that the applicant no longer occupies the highest order,” said Alim.

Alim added all the members of parliament, representing the voters who elected them. If the voters are sovereign is no longer included in the parent region, but has been included in the expansion area, then the legislators who remained in the area of the parent is not representing the voters who have included the expansion area. ”Thus, each regional division, and there is no transfer of Parliament seats to the area expansion would change the configuration of the sovereign voters to support a particular political party. Based on all the legal considerations described above, the Court believes the petition is groundless arguments according to law, “said Alim.

In such decisions, there are three constitutional judges who have a different opinion (dissenting opinion), namely the Constitutional Court Justice Maria Farida Indrati, Hamdan Zoelva, and Anwar Usman. All three claimed the Court should grant the petition to declare Article 354 paragraph (2) of Act No. 27/2009 was conditionally unconstitutional, which is unconstitutional to the extent not interpreted: “the composition of the leadership of parliament did not change despite a change in the composition of the number of seats each political party may result in the expansion area legislators from districts / cities which occurs after the determination of the leadership of regency / city carrier based on the results of the elections “. Of the various provisions, the legal guarantee of DPRD leadership tenure is five years and there is no mechanism to let him go in the middle of the term of office except under the provisions of Article 42 of Regulation 16/2010. 

Therefore, the reasons used to replace one of the leadership position Regency Kupang which is held by the applicant by reason of the number of seats was reduced HANURA Party after the transfer of some members of the local parliament of Sabu Raijua district legislators may result in the division is not fair to the applicant because it violates provisions of the reasons for the dismissal of parliament leaders in the middle term.

Hamdan expressed none of the legal mechanisms provided for in legislation to dismiss the head of parliament due to changes in the composition of the number of seats due to regional expansion, so the law must provide a guarantee for someone who has been appointed head of Parliament for a term of five years and can not be dismissed in term of office for no reason that it is set clearly. Mechanisms determine the leadership of Parliament is not a constitutional issue, but legal policy and political issues of law forming the Act.

“That is, whether the head of Parliament is determined based on the ratings of the seat of political parties or the rank number of seats in Parliament or election by the parliament just a way and purely political choice and not a constitutional issue. Therefore, in this case legal policy issues must not sacrifice the constitutional rights of citizens to obtain a fair legal certainty is guaranteed by the constitution in this case the right of a person who has been promoted to senior leadership positions during the five-year parliament that has been guaranteed by the laws that already exist previously. Therefore, to prevent violations of the principle of a fair legal certainty guaranteed by the constitution, then the interpretation of Article 354 paragraph (2) of Law 27/2009 is to be limited and affirmed by the Court, “Hamdan explained. (Lulu Anjarsari/mh/Yazid.tr)

 

http://www.mahkamahkonstitusi.go.id/index.php?page=website_eng.BeritaInternalLengkap&id=5619

Read more »

Halimah Agustina Kamil Gave Evidence on Judicial Review of Act of Marriage

Chairunnisa Jafizham, Halimah Agustina Kamil’s attorney, former wife of Bambang Trihatmodjo, were reading the petition at a hearing of the judicial Act No. 1 of 1974 on Marriage, Wednesday (27 / 7)

Halimah Agustina Kamil’s petition, former wife of Bambang Trihatmodjo, held again at the Constitutional Court (MK), Wednesday (27/07/2011). The trial for case No. 38/PUU-IX/2011 about testing the constitutionality of the material of Law 1 / 1974 on Marriage (Marriage Act) is implemented by a Panel chaired by Ahmad Fadlil Sumadi, accompanied by Achmad Sodiki and Harjono.
Halimah who represented by her legal counsel Chairunnisa Jafizham declared, after making a deeper study of the proceedings preliminary review of Marriage Act, her client decided not to submit repair requests. “Judge Your Honor, after we did a study on the first trial, we assume that the repair, we did not do,” she said.
Furthermore, Halimah through Chairunnisa strengthen the arguments of the petition by submitting proof of P-1 through P-8. Evidence contains: Decision Central Jakarta Religious Court, the Jakarta High Court verdict, ruling the Supreme Court of Cassation, Judgement of Supreme Court Review, Letter of wedlock, ID card and family card, Act 1 / 1974 on Marriage, and the last letter of moving house. “Thus, for the evidence it deemed to have endorsed today,” said Ahmad Fadlil Sumadi tap with a hammer as he signs a one-time evidence approved.
In addition to the evidence, Halimah also filed six experts to be heard at the next session. Chairunnisa call an expert who will be presented by Shinta Nuriah Abdurrahman Wahid.
On Friday (07/08/2011) the Court has opened a preliminary judicial hearing Marriage Act filed by Halimah Agustina Kamil. Halimah testing out the provisions of the divorce terms set forth in Article 39 Paragraph (2) f of Marriage Act along the phrase “between husband and wife will not be able to get along as husband and wife” is contradictory to Article 28D Paragraph (1) and Article 28H Paragraph (2) of 45.
According to Halimah through her attorney, Chairunnisa, wives often take a sacrificed in quarrels and disputes. In fact, the fact that disputes and arguments most often caused by caused by her husband, for example a husband had an affair with another woman. (Annisa Anindya / Nur Rosihin Ana/mh/Yazid.tr)

http://www.mahkamahkonstitusi.go.id/index.php?page=website_eng.BeritaInternalLengkap&id=5616

Read more »

Salim Alkatiri Reviewed Final and Binding Decision of the Constitutional Court

Principal Petitioner, Salim Alkatiri was reading the plea at a hearing improvement of judicial review of Article 10 paragraph 1 letter a of Act No. 24 of 2003 regarding the Constitutional Court on Tuesday (26 / 7)

The review on Act No. 24/2003 on the Constitutional Court held again at Tuesday (07/26/2011). Assembly with the agenda of this petition were Ahmad Fadlil Sumadi as Chairman of the Panel, and were accompanied by Achmad Sodiki and Anwar Usman. The trial for this case Number 36/PUU-IX/2011 filed by Salim Alkatiri. The material was Article 10 paragraph 1 letter a, of Act No. 24/2003 governing authority of the Constitutional Court to adjudicate at the first and last decision is final.

In front of the panel of the Constitutional Court, Salim improve the legal standing of the Petitioner. ”The most important thing is to point 3, of the legal position of legal standing,” said Salim.

Salim feels aggrieved by the decision of the Court Number 224/PHPU.D VIII/2010 on Election Results Dispute Kab. South Buru pronounced December 31, 2010. In the ruling No. 224/PHPU.D VIII/2010, the Court declared the application partner Salim Alkatiri-La Ode Badwi unacceptable.

Constitutional Court’s decision is final and binding. This has become an obstacle for Salim to make an appeal, so that Salim could not qualify as candidates for the General Election South Buru because it had been a prisoner with a sentence of 2 years in prison. Salim argued that the Court alter its own decision, namely Decision Number 4/PUU-VII/2009, resulting in him can not follow the General Election South Buru.

Constitutional Court Decision No. 4/PUU-VII/2009, dated March 24, 2009 has defined the terms of the provisions of Article 58 f of Law 12/2008 regarding the requirements as a Regional Head and Deputy Head of the Region. Article 58 of Law 12/2008 points f 3 states, “honesty or openness about the background of her identity as an ex-convict”.

Salim admitted that he had revealed his identity as an ex-convict. ”We have expressed openly to the public in the newspaper Suara Maluku in Ambon, Maluku province,” said Salim.

According to him, the Court had violated the verdict Number 4/PUU-VII/2009.”Violate the Constitutional Court ruling that he created himself,” he continued. In fact, Salim added, the decision of Class I Ambon District Court to allow the couple Salim Alkatiri-La Ode Badwi South Buru following the General Election of 2010.(Nur Rosihin Ana/mh/Yazid.tr)

http://www.mahkamahkonstitusi.go.id/index.php?page=website_eng.BeritaInternalLengkap&id=5612

Read more »

Judicial Review on Act of Forestry: The Government Consider Petition Blurred

Petitioner’s attorney, Muhammad Ali Dharma Utama is listening to the statements of the Government in the trial testing of Article 4 Paragraph (2) letter b Act No. 41 of 1999 on Forestry, Tuesday (26 / 7)

Petitions are not obvious and obscure (obscuur libel) because Petitioner does not clearly describe the applicant’s legal position. It is delivered by the Government, represented by Prasetyo Agung Gunardo in response to the petition for judicial review of Article 4 Paragraph (2) letter b Act No. 41 of 1999 on Forestry, Maskur Anang bin Kemas Anang Muhammad reviewing the Act. Constitutional Court held a hearing to listen to statements of the Government and Parliament are registered with a number 34/PUU-IX/2011 on Tuesday (26 / 7).

“In the description, Petitioner did not explain its legal status as individuals or WN or a private legal entities considering Petitioner argues that as the owner of PT Jaya Mas Ricky. Petitioner did not explain his position and also does not explain his position within the company. Based on the above, then the position of the applicant is considered vague and does not meet the qualifications as required in Article 51 paragraph (1) of the Constitutional Court, “said Gunardo.

Furthermore, Gunardo explained that the construction of constitutional rights violations described Petitioner did not expressly unravel. Petitioner argues that the losses caused by the transition function of plantation land owned by the Petitioner by the Government through the Minister of Forestry. If it is true, continued Gunardo, the decision a quo in the domain authority of state administrative officials, so there is no causal link between the losses suffered by the applicant with the provisions petitioned for review. ”Based on the foregoing, it should be legal efforts undertaken by the applicant is through the judiciary, namely the Administrative Court or the Court,” he explained.

According Gunardo, specifically against the authority in Article 4 paragraph (2) letter b law is intended to accommodate the dynamics of development, both outside and in the forestry sector in the forestry sector itself. On the other hand, did not rule out the existence of certain zoning into the forest. Further regulation regarding certain zoning areas into forest land or forest to forest area is not stipulated in Government Regulation Number 44 Year 2004 on Forestry Planning.” The provisions of Article 4 paragraph (3) a quo law determines that the acquisition of forests by the state shall respect customary laws as long as it exists and its existence is recognized, and not contrary to national interests,” he said.

In addition, control of forest by the state, the Government also pay attention to the rights of existing soil. Petitioners’ argument against the existence of losses suffered due to custody pursuant to a general verdict of the judiciary, according to the Government is not the constitutional rights and / or authorities referred to Article 51 of the Constitutional Court Law, but linked to criminal acts committed by the applicant, that is by deliberately moving the others for destruction of property of others. ”Based on the above explanation, the Government asked His Excellency Chief Justice of the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Indonesia to deliver a verdict stating that the applicant has no legal standing position or a clear legal standing. Reject the petition for judicial review petition in whole or at least claim petition is niet ontvankelijk verklaard or unacceptable, “he explained.

Panel of Judges, chaired by the Chief Court Moh Mahfud MD, accompanied by eight other judges’ constitution ratified 40 pieces of evidence. ”Then, the next hearing would be opened if the applicant was willing to call witnesses or experts. So you dated two slowest were already enrolled when presenting expert. If it does not register on 2 expert or witness, meaning assume this examination fairly, so schedule the next hearing is the pronunciation of the verdict. And for that if indeed the pronunciation of the verdict, then surely both the Government and the applicant, no later than December 9 convey the conclusions of the overall course of this trial, “explained Mahfud.

Through a lawyer, Muhammad Ali Dharma Utama, Petitioners argue that their constitutional rights violated due to the enactment of Article 4 Paragraph (2) letter b of the Forestry Law. According to Dharma Ali, a quo article is contrary to Article 27 Paragraph (1), Article 28C Paragraph (2), 28D Paragraph (3), and 28H Paragraph (4) of the 1945 Constitution. Article 4 Paragraph 92) of the Forestry Act states “(2) Forest control by the State referred to in paragraph (1) authorizes the government to: (b) determine the status of certain areas as forest area or forest area as non-forest area”. Petitioners argued the article to give freedom to the Minister of Forestry to determine the status of certain areas as forest or non-forest areas such as forest areas have been given an opportunity to the Minister of Forestry to break the law by manipulating and manipulate the soil to be over the functions that are outside the forest area are not yet a forest area. As happened in the estates applicant who is in agricultural cultivation area has been converted by the Minister of Forestry as a forest industry plants. (Lulu Anjarsari/mh/Yazid.tr)

http://www.mahkamahkonstitusi.go.id/index.php?page=website_eng.BeritaInternalLengkap&id=5611

Read more »

Fleeing the petition, Judicial Review Act Criminal Code and Law on Judicial Authority Not Received

Principal applicant and Aryanto Nugroho and Tjahjadi Nugroho, Commissioner and President Director of PT. Mutual Tlaga Jaya, Semarang, Central Java, while hearing the reading of the Decision Testing Book of the Law of Civil Law (Article 616, 617, 618, 619, 620, and 1918) and Law No. 4 Year 2004 regarding Judicial Power (Article 1, 23, 28 and 33). In Amar Decision of the Constitutional Court (MK) can not accept applications both on Monday (25 / 7) in the courtroom Plenary Court Building.

Jakarta, MKOnline - Tjahjadi and Aryanto Nugroho Nugroho, respectively as Commissioner and President Director of PT. Mutual Tlaga Jaya, Semarang, Central Java, should be tolerant, after the Constitutional Court (MK) can not accept applications both in hearing the pronunciation of the verdict on Monday (7/25/2011).

“To declare the petition is unacceptable,” said Chairman of the Plenary Session Judge Court, Moh. Mahfud MD when reading the ruling of the Judicial Review case 4/PUU-IX/2011 Book of Civil Law Act (Civil Code) and Act 4 / 2004 on Judicial Power.

Legal issues raised by Petitioner is about testing the material to the substance of Article 616, Article 617, Article 618, Article 619, Article 620 and Article 1918 Civil Code, Article 19 of Government Regulation (PP) 10/1961 on Land Registration; Article 1 Regulation of the Minister of Agrarian 14/1961 on Demand and Permit Transfer of Land Rights, Article 23 and Article 37 paragraph (1) PP 24/1997, Article 1, Section 23, Article 28 and Article 33 of Law 4 / 2004 on Judicial Power, against the 1945 Constitution.

Court in its opinion read by Judge Maria Farida Indrati, stating, Petitioner argues itself as a legal entity of public and private legal entities as well.” But the Court’s opinion that the applicant only qualifies as a private legal entity, as referred to in Article 51 paragraph (1) letter c of the Constitutional Court,” said Maria.

Application Fleeing

According to the Court, although the applicant qualifies as a private legal entity in the testing of the 1945 Act, but Petitioner did not explain the losses they experienced. Though the Court in a preliminary trial date of January 17, 2011 has checked the application and gives advice to Petitioner to improve and complete the application no later than 14 days. However, Petitioner did not fix the application, while improvements have exceeded the time limit.

Therefore, the Court examined the petition which had been registered without changes. The Court considered the substance of the petition blurred. ”Against the substance of the petition, the Court considered the petition obscure material (obscuur libel),” Maria continued.

Court declared no longer need to examine and consider the principal substance of the petition because the petition vague and qualified person as defined by Article 51 paragraph (1) and paragraph (2) the Constitutional Court Law. Thus, according to the Court, the Petitioner has no legal status (legal standing). (Nur Rosihin Ana /mh)

http://www.mahkamahkonstitusi.go.id/index.php?page=website_eng.BeritaInternalLengkap&id=5606

Read more »

SKLN Kab. East Kutai Vs Minister of Energy and Mineral Resources: Mining Experts Affirm Applicant is a Local Government Authority

Justices of the Constitutional Assembly of Experts are listening to testimony from the applicant Prof. Dr. Laica Marzuki (Professor of Law Faculty of Hasanuddin and former Constitutional Court judge) in the Session of the Dispute Authority of State Institutions (SKLN) between the Ministry of Energy and Mineral Resources (ESDM) and the Regional Government of East Kutai regency, on Thursday (21 / 7) in the Plenary Session of the House MK.

Jakarta, MKOnline - Four experts from the Petitioner delivered his statement before the Plenary Session of the case SKLN between the Ministry of Energy and the Government District. East Kutai, on Thursday (21 / 7). The four experts who delivered his statement, Prof. Dr. Laica Marzuki (Professor of Law Faculty of Hasanuddin and ex-Judge Court), Prof. Muchsan (Former Supreme Court Justice), Dr. Indra Butler (Lecturer Unpad FH), and Prof.. Mas’ud Said (Lecturer Faculty of Law University of Malang).
 
The trial was the case with Number 3/SKLN-IX/2011 chaired by the Chairman of the Constitutional Court (MK), Moh. Mahfud MD. Petitioner’s expert was given his first submit his statement, namely Laica Marzuki.
 
Ex-judge constitution deliver related interpretations of Article 1 paragraph (1) of the 1945 Constitution in conjunction with Article 18 paragraph (1) and subsection (5) the same law. In the articles stipulated that Indonesia is a unitary state is a republic and is divided into areas of the province. Further areas of the province is further divided into counties and cities whose governments are run with broad autonomy. However, government affairs governed by the laws into the affairs of the central government.
 
Further Laica said that the affairs of the central government according to the 1945 Constitution, namely the political affairs of foreign, defense, security, justice, monetary and national fiscal, and religion. ”Outside of the central government affairs, government affairs under the authority of other autonomous regions. This mining excluding central government affairs, “said Laica.
 
Laica also said Law. 4 in 2009 on Mineral and Coal has made local governments, especially local government district. East Kutai unable to perform its constitutional authority to regulate and manage their own affairs in the fields of energy and mineral resources.
 
“The mining of minerals and energy it ought to be a constitutional government or the provinces, kabipaten / town in casu the applicant District Government of East Kutai, East Kalimantan,” said Laica.
 
The same thing also expressed GMU Professors, Muhsan. Related to regional autonomy, Muhsan said that the local government, both provincial and regency / city that existed as an autonomous region has the broadest authority onotom too.”According to Prof. Mr. Durpsteen in his book ‘Administratiief Recht’, otonomo authority is empowered to take care of their own households which include the authority to regulate and manage its own human resources, financial manage their own authority, and authority to empower the community, “said Muhsan.
 
Furthermore, Muhsan said, according to Article 33 paragraph (2) and paragraph (3) of the 1945 Constitution, local government has the right to explore the sources of finance including managing the natural resources in the area of administration.However, after the advent of Law no. 4 of 1999 which clearly states the management of mining Mining under the authority of central government.
 
“Supposedly, an authority must be comprehensive both procedural and substantive. This means, the management authority that includes the mining licensing, zoning, or operation of mining activities is a local government authority, “said Muhsan. (Yusti Nurul Agustin / mh) 

http://www.mahkamahkonstitusi.go.id/index.php?page=website_eng.BeritaInternalLengkap&id=5600

Read more »

Petitioner’s Experts: Asean Charter Displace People’s Sovereignty

Sri Edi Swasono become the Experts of the Petitioner reviewing the Act No. 38 of 2008 concerning Ratification of the Charter of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations [Article 1, Paragraph (5)and Article 2 Paragraph (2) sub n], Wednesday (20 / 7) at the Plenary Room

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)

http://www.mahkamahkonstitusi.go.id/index.php?page=website_eng.BeritaInternalLengkap&id=5598

Read more »

Not Effective, Act of Health on Smoking Warning Reviewed

Petitioner attorney , Mustakim (center) reading the petition in front of the judges on trial reviewing Article 114 of Act No. 36 of 2009 on Health on Monday (18 / 7) in Meeting Room Panel

Two doctors who focus on the dangers of tobacco in cigarettes, Widyastuti Soerojo and Muherman Harun, along with the Association of Public Health Student Senate of Indonesia (ISMKMI) filed a petition for judicial review of Article 114 of Act No 36/2009 on Health on Monday (18 / 7). Petitioner considers written warnings on cigarette packs ineffective.
 
Petitioner considers the explanation of Article 114 on Act of Health violated Article 199 paragraph (1). In Article 199 paragraph (1) stated, "Any person who intentionally produce or put cigarettes into the territory of the Unitary Republic of Indonesia does not include health warnings with pictures form referred to in Article 114 shall be punished imprisonment of 5 (five) years and a fine at most of Rp 500,000,000 (five hundred million dollars). "
 
While the explanation of Article 114 states, "The definition of 'health warnings' in writing that this provision is clear and easily legible and can be accompanied by pictures or other forms".
 
The existence of the word "may" in the explanation of the Act on Article 114 according to the Petitioner made the warning in Article 199 is not absolute. Thus, cigarette manufacturers can use the dangers of cigarette warnings in written form only without including pictures. In fact, according to Petitioner, the warning in the form of images more effectively and openly in conveying information about the dangers of smoking compared to only write the warning.
 
Mustakim, Petitioner's attorney said the supposed explanation of the health law section 114 reads, "The definition of 'health warnings' in writing that this provision is clear and easily legible and accompanied by pictures or other forms."
 
Panel consisting of Judge Mohammad Alim as chairman and was accompanied by Usman Anwar and Ahmad Fadlil Sumadi as members of the inaugural session of the delivery of advice to the Petitioner. Alim suggested that the applicant reiterated the terms of use phrases or words used in a more precise explanation of the Act of Health on Article 114. Meanwhile, Fadlil ask the petitioner to explain where the article being reviewed by petitioner or article which is contrary to the explanation of another article. (Yusti Nurul Agustin/mh/Yazid.tr)

 

http://www.mahkamahkonstitusi.go.id/index.php?page=website_eng.BeritaInternalLengkap&id=5590

Read more »