View from the monitor a situation of a judicial review on Act on Election, Thursday (12/11), at The Court Panel Room. (Doc. CCRI/Prana Patrayoga Adiputra)
Jakarta-MKOnline, The Constitutional Court (The Court) again held a review on Act Number 10 of 2008 about Election of members of the House of Representatives, City Council, and the Regional House of Representatives (Act on Election), Thursday (12/11), at the Panel Room of The Court’s Building. The Case registered with Number 131/PUU-VII/2009 was submitted by Andreas Hugo Pareira, H.R. Sunaryo, and Judge Sorimuda Pohan through their legal counsel, Ahmad Rosadi Harahap.
In the session to examine improved Petition, Ahmad Rosadi, as the Petitioner’s legal counsel stated that they did not make any corrections on the file to follow the advices from the Board of Justice in the previous session. "According to the Petitioners, what are written in the file has explained all constitutional damages that the Petitioners experienced. Therefore, The Petitioners felt unnecessary to make any modification in the file," he mentioned.
Ahmad also explained that the Petitioner would not propose any experts because the Petitioners considered that the evidences submitted were enough to support their arguments. "We demanded the Court to present independent experts as witnesses. We are only to present the Related Party," he pointed out.
Responding to the Petitioner’s request, Chairman of the Panel Board of Justice, Achmad Sodiki, explained that The Court could not present any experts for the sake of the Petitioners. "What for does The Court present experts for the Petitioners? It is The Petitioners who suffers from loss, then the experts are there to help the Petitioners in explaining the constitutional loss," he argued.
Meanwhile, Constitutional Justice Harjono felt sorry for the Petitioners’ attitude for being ignorant to the advices from the Panel Board of Justices. "The Petitioners did not explain in detail regarding the Petitioners’ constitutional loss. The Petitioners should have considered that if the Acts were annulled, can your right to be the members of the Parliament be rehabilitated? Because Parliament members for 2009 – 2014 periods have been inaugurated," he mentioned.
Hearing the explanation from the Panel Board of Justice, The Petitioners insisted to keep their arguments. In the Petition, The Petitioners demanded all norms within the Act on Election to be announced as against the 1945 Constitution and not having a binding power. The Panel Board of Justices also legalized 23 evidences in this session. (Lulu A./YDJ tr.)
Friday, November 13, 2009 | 15:11 WIB 288