‘Breaking through Signs’ for the sake of Substantive Justice
Image

The Chief Justice of the Constitutional Court Moh. Mahfud MD became the resource person in the Focus Group Discussion (FGD) program organized by the National Law Development Board (BPHN). The program with the theme of “Dinamika MK dalam Mengawal Konstitusi/Dynamics of the Constitutional Court in Guarding the Constitution” was held in the BPHN Hall of the Ministry of Law and Human Rights) on Tuesday (2/11).


Jakarta, MKOnline – In exercising its authority, the Constitutional Court (The Court) have signs which must be complied with. For example, The Court’s decisions shall not contain norms (regulatory), The Court shall not pass a decision in excess of the petition (ultra petita), or that in a Dispute over the Results of General Elections (PHPU), The Court has authority only to decide upon the dispute or errors in vote count recapitulation. However, in practice, it is difficult to always comply with such signs. Sometimes, The Court needs to make legal breakthroughs to realize justice. 

This was stated by Chief Justice of The Court, Moh. Mahfud MD, the Focus Group Discussion (FGD) program organized by the National Law Development Board (BPHN) on Tuesday (2/11). The program with the theme of “Dinamika MK dalam Mengawal Konstitusi/Dynamics of The Constitutional Court in Guarding the Constitution” was held in the BPHN Hall of the Ministry of Law and Human Rights on 4th Floor, East Jakarta. Also present as a speaker was the Professor of State Administrative Law of Andalas University, Prof. Saldi Isra.

“If we are too rigid in dealing with those regulations, the Constitutional Court cannot contribute to the constitutional law development,” continued Mahfud explaining.

According to Mahfud, the reason for the Constitutional Court to ‘violate’ such signs is based on the progressive law, or in other words, for materializing substantive justice. “We do not want to be bound by the law which does not give any legal path. Lack of such path will not give any benefit,” said Mahfud. “Meanwhile, a Constitution anywhere always rests upon three principles: existence of certainty, justice and benefit.”

Therefore, according to Mahfud, in materializing the goal, it is necessary for justices to have a clear and explicit attitude in decision-making. (Constitutional Court) Justices has to be fair and capable of elaborating legal considerations with facts in the hearing in a decision. Therefore, the whole community can easily understand and enjoy the benefits of the aforementioned decision.

In addition, Mahfud also contributed some thoughts for further discussion and study in this FGD. One of them was when Mahfud put forward the idea of giving The Court new authority namely to handle constitutional complaints. “However, the requirements must be strictly regulated,” warned Mahfud. Therefore, in the future, not all the people may file a constitutional complaint. (Dodi/mh)


Wednesday, November 03, 2010 | 14:20 WIB 259