The Constitutional Justice considered posita and petitum raised by the Petitioners Risang Bima Wijaya and Bersihar Lubis was not sinchrone. Because, in the posita revision, the Petitioners explained about constitutionalizm of a norm, meanwhile in the petitum the Petitioners only argued about the criminal sanction which held in humiliation Article.

In their legal grounds, by their attorney Anggara SH the Petitioners stated that description of the offense as meant by Article 310 Paragraph (1) Criminal Law Procedure Code (KUHAP) caused a constitutional loss on them. It was because the article was easily used by some people who did not like freedom of the press in raising its though and argument, as guaranteed in Article 28E Paragraph (2), (3), and Articlel 28F of 1945 Constitution.

But in the petitum, the Petitioner only argued on prison term " It is like you think that the humiliation is not a crime, in fact in the description of the offense you consider it as a crime. So, there is an unfix logic here,” Justice I Dewa Gede Palguna stated, yesterday (05/06).

Source : www.jurnalnasional.com
Photo    : MKRIs Doc.
Translator: Kencana Suluh Hikmah (MKRI)