The Constitutional Court conducted a trial on Act No. 31 Year 2007 on the forming of Tual City in Maluku Province (Act on Tual City) towards the 1945 Constitution on Wednesday (30/01). The Petitioners speaking on behalf of Customary Community Union (Rat/Orangkay) Kei (Nuhu Evav) through their legal counsel, H. Supriyanto Refa, S.H., M.H., considered the Act on Tual City both formally and materially violated Article 18 Paragraph (1), Article 18B Paragraph (2), Article 20 Paragraph (1) of the 1945 Constitution. The Petitioners considered that the existence of the Act had damaged their constitutional rights because the making of the Act did not meet the requirement in Article 18 Paragraph (1) of the 1945 Constitution and Act No. 32 Year 2004 on Regional Government (Act on Regional Government).

The Petitioners also claimed that the forming of Tual City did not get an approval from the Southeast Maluku Regent and the Southeast Maluku House of Representatives. Besides that, in the expansion process of the Southeast Regency and the forming of Tual City there had not been a polling of people’s aspiration before. The approval from Maluku Governor was considered by the Petitioners not based on the result of the regional research conducted by a special team.

Responding to petition, the Governor of Maluku, Karel Albert Relahalu, who came to the trial as the Related Party said that since 1997 based on people’s aspiration, the government of Maluku had set the Blue Print of middle term program for area expansion, based on the result of the executive meeting of the Provincial Parliament (DPRD Tingkat I) of Maluku Province. According to Karel, one of the programs in the blue print was the plan of forming Tual City. Karel also denied if the forming of the city was regarded as not considering the aspiration of the people in Southeast Maluku Regency. “In fact, the forming of Tual City was fully supported byt the kings in Southeast Maluku. Because the forming of Tual City was eventually aimed at developing the Southeast Maluku,” exclaimed Karel.

Speaking in the same tone as Karel, H. Mahmud Muhammad Tamher, Head of House of Representatives of Southeast Maluku Regency, said that the forming mechanism of Tual City had been based on formal mechanism as well as the informal one according to the existing procedures. Besides that, continued Mahmud, the people of Tual City themselves had been ready with the expansion, because the expansion did not change or disturb the existing cultures. Mahmud also said that of the 19 tradition figures in Southeast Maluku, 15 people had stated their support in the expansion and the forming of Tual City. “Two people that filed the petition is not representative because they are not kings nor leaders,” claimed Mahmud.

Dissenting opinion was made by the Regent of Southeast Maluku, Herman Adrian Kudubun. According to Herman, the expansion of Tual City had not been carried out consistently based on the exsisting regulations. Herman also considered the proper test conducted by the Governor of Maluku seemed to be in a hurry. In fact, according to Herman, the result of the test could not be academically justified.

“The aspirations from the people to the Regent was actually refusal of the plan for area expansion. In fact, the expansion concept was initially aimed at improving the people’s prosperity, however in reality it did not go as planned,” Herman pointed out.

At the closing of the trial, the Constitution Justice Board directly chaired by the Chief of Constitutional Court, Jimly Asshiddiqie suggested all parties to present their experts, whether experts on Customary Laws or on Regional Autonomy. “In order not to have a debate between the Governor and the Regent, it is better that each party used experts and witnesses as evidence, which we will crossexamined later with experts and witnesses presented by each party,” advised Jimly. (Andhini Sayu Fauzia/Yogi Djatnika)