One of the authorities of the Constitutional Court (MK) is to test the constitutionality of a legislation. If a norm of a legislation is considered to violate the 1945 Constitution, the Constitutional Court was allowed to anul it, both partially or entirely. Therefore, similar to the House of Representatives, the Constitutional Court can be considered as legislators, but a negative legislator.

That was said by Constitution Justice I Dewa Gede Palguna as he welcomed the visit from students of Universitas Pendidikan Nasional (Udiknas), Denpasar, Bali, on Tuesday (25/3) morning at the Constitutional Court building, Jakarta.

In front of around one hundred students of Law Faculty of Udiknas, Palguna explained that the Constitutional Court was called a negative legislator because even though the Constitutional Court could cancel the enactment of a legislation, it could not make a verdict to make a change in that legislation.. “The Constitutional Court only has the authority to examine whether or not a legislation violates the 1945 Constitution,” he explained. Palguna also said that besides being able to examine the norms within a legislation, the Constitutional Court could also examine the forming process of a legislation or what so called a formal trial.

Constitutional complaint
When answering a question from a student about the ability to examine the rule beneath an act if considered against the constitution, Palguna said that until now, that was under Supreme Court’s authority, not the Constitutional Court. However, according to Palguna, in other countries if there was a regulation under an act or a government policy considered to violate the constitution, it could be filed to the Constitutional Court through a constitutional complaint mechanism.. “In Indonesia, such mechanism has not been installed yet,” he pointed out. [] ardli/Yogi Djatnika