The Constitutional Court conducted a preliminary examination of a judicial review of Law Number 22/1997 on Narcotics on Thursday, 1 February 2007 at 10 am.

The petition filled by four petitioners, namely Edith Yunita Sianturi and Rani Andriani, the prisoners of the women prison located in Tangerang, and two Australians: Myuran Sukumaran and Andrew Chan who are also undergoing sentence in Krobokan Prison of Kuta, Bali.  The petitioners are represented by their legal coucelors: Dr. Todung Mulya Lubis, S.H., LL.M., Ir. Alexander Lay, S.H., LL.M., dan Arief Susijamto Wirjohoetomo, S.H., M.H.

The petitioners have been sentenced to death and have undergone trial sessions from District Court until the Supreme Court for committing criminal actions against the Law on Narcotics in the jurisdiction of the Republic of Indonesia.  Whereas the death sentence for the petitioners is made under the Articles of threat of the death sentence within the Law of Narcotics.

The verdict is indeed legally binding (in kracht van gewijsde). Nonetheless, it has not been executed yet. In the explanation of the petition, the petitioners claim the death sentence has violated their constitutional rights and interests to live as guaranteed and protected by the 1945 Constitution.

Consequently, the petitioners ask the board of constitutional justices to annul Article 80 (1) letter a, (2) letter a, (3) letter a; Article 81 (3) letter a; and Article 82 (1) letter a, (2) letter a, (3) letter a of Law on Narcotics since it is against Article 28A, 28I (1), and (4) of the 1945 Constitution, and declare the Articles to have no legal binding.

Todung explains further regarding the foreigner petitioner, that fundamental issue is related to human rights, which among others is the right to live belonging not only to the citizen but also all human being, “Therefore, we would like to ask for input from the panel of justices in terms of the restriction of the legal standing regulated by Article 51 of Law number 24/2003 on the Constitutional Court,” says Todung.

Responding Todung, the panel chairman, Justice Mukthie Fadjar suggests the petitioners’ counselors to add the argumentation related to the rights of foreigners to file a judicial review of laws, which can be done among others by elaborating references of other countries. “If you file Article 51 of the Law on the Constitutional Court, so be it. It is good for the development of Indonesian Law,” says Mukthie. 

Continuing Justice Mukthie’s elaboration, the panel member, Justice Roestandi puts on an example that annulling Article 50 of Law 24/2003 on the Constitutional Court was a preliminary effort of the petitioners (at that moment) before filing judicial review of laws prevail before the amendments of the 1945 Constitution. “The same effort can be taken by the petitioners of this case, “Roestandi adds.  

Receving some inputs, Todung admit that he is inspired and will try the breakthrough at the Constitutional Court regarding the legal standing of the material review of laws especially the ones related to human rights. (Translated by mrs. hrs.)