We must understand that when the values and norms implied in the constitution are put into practice and then cause a problem, it is something normal because when the constitution was formulated, we did not have any idea what would happen in the future. The solution for such matter is evaluation.

The thought was conveyed by the Chief Justice of the Constitutional Court, Prof. Dr. Jimly Asshidique, S.H. in the colloquium of the Constitutional Court on the state administration of the Republic of Indonesia for the Chairmen and the Members of Association of Indonesian Local Councils (ADEKSI) on Thursday (7/6) in Jakarta.

Jimly provided an example that there are many articles in the 1945 Constitution that can be evaluated including the article on military court. Is it necessary to have a provision on military court in the 1945 Constitution? Jimly described that it all started in 1970 during the golden days of the new order. The regime issued Law Number 14 of 1970 which included the provision regarding four jurisdictions of court namely the court of general jurisdiction, the religious court, the state administration court, and the military court.

He added that in 1970, the military court was greatly recognized because in the beginning of the New Order regime, all the previous offences including those committed by civilians were put into trial in the Extraordinary Military Court. “The military court is basically the internal disciplinary court for military organization. But in emergency situation, it can be functioned to replace the court of general jurisdiction,” said Jimly.

According to Jimly, the state is no longer in an emergency situation. Therefore, the normal court system must be reinstated. However, by the third amendment of the 1945 Constitution, the provision on military court has been officially included in the Constitution in Article 24 Paragraph (2). The conditional provision for emergency situation is now included in the constitution. Whereas when a soldier commits a general crime, it has been recommended that he/she be brought before the court of general jurisdiction. Jimly said that such mechanism is appropriate because the state is in a normal situation. “As a consequence, the military court lost its jurisdiction. Based upon this condition, is it necessary for the military court to be officially provided in the constitution as a separate court? These matters can be evaluated,” Jimly explained.

He also added that the Constitution is open for continuous evaluation and improvement through political mechanism. Jimly stated that the amendment and the improvement of the constitution can be developed not only through the amendment as provided in Article 37 of the 1945 Constitution, but also through state administration conventions. Aside from that, there is a third way to make an amendment and improvement namely by conducting a judicial interpretation. “Thus, the role of the Constitutional Court for the constitutional interpretation in the constitutional cases can assist eliminating flaws in the 1945 Constitution,” he described.

Jimly said that we should not be too concern with the flaws in the 1945 Constitution. Especially, up until now, there is no perfect constitution in the world because it is all only a political product. And once again, the continuous evaluation is the solution. (Wiwik Budi Wasito)