Witnesses from the Government Bambang Soepijanto MM in the hearing of the judicial review of Act No. 19/2004 on Stipulation of Government Regulation in Lieu of Act No. 1/2004 concerning Amendment to Act No. 41/1999 on Forestry in the Constitutional Court on Wednesday (16 / 2 / 11).
Jakarta, MKOnline - The advanced hearing in the review of Act No. 19/2004 on Stipulation of Government Regulation in Lieu of Act No. 1/2004 concerning Amendment to Act No. 41/1999 on Forestry held again by the Constitutional Court (MK), Wednesday (16/20), at the Plenary Court Room of the Constitutional Court. The lawsuit is registered in registrar office by number 72/PUU-VIII/2010 which petitioned by Major of Penajam Paser Utara, Andi Harahap.
In the court hearing session to request clarification from the Government and the Witnesses, Government represented by Bambang Soepijanto who requested the Petitioner to prove that as a society which of his rights was impaired by the provisions of Article 38 paragraph (3) and Article 50 paragraph (3) letter g. According to Bambang, referring to Article 33 of the Constitution 1945, the management of forestry was in accordance with fairness, sustainable, the spirit of democracy, justice and continuous. "By such management of forestry implementation, therefore the state has the right to take charge of the forest for the purpose of prosperity of the people and regulate the legal correlation of the land. Base on the right, the Government has authorized to give license to other parties for forestry activities or other activities that have to use the forest. For such reason every activity that exploit forest is selectively licensed and planned, "he explained.
Bambang also said that provision in article 38 paragraph (3) Act of Forestry was in accordance with Article 1 paragraph 15. Moreover, prohibition for forest exploitation without license from minister of forestry was applied for every society. “It was accordance with article 1 paragraph 3 of the constitution 1945, therefore Article 38 paragraph 3 and article 50 paragraph 3 was not violate the constitution 1945“ said Bambang.
Further, Bambang also said if the petition is approved by the Court, it will cause a bad effect namely forest destructive in some region will cause impact for other region, certain policies giving to a region might be disrupt licensed mechanism of a region which threaten human survival. “Third, it will cause legal uncertainty which issued by Ministry of Forestry as mentioned in Article 38 paragraph 3 Act of Forestry. Ecosystem will be difficult to control since every region considering only economic factor” he explained.
In the hearing, petitioner presented several witneses, one of them was Sugino who exposed time-consuming procedure of exploration licensing. “We always get difficulties to deal with licensing” Many people were complaining if they want to deal with Borrow-Use. It took time too long dealing with licensing. Somewhile, it took years because Regent should give a recommendation to governor before give carbon copy to the minister of forestry” he said.
Meanwhile, the other witness of petitioner, Eddy revealed that he has been applying exploration license since end of 2008 but it is not done yet till now. “There is an ambiguity in the regulation of Ministry of Forestry, it must be investigated before apply license.” Moreover, it must ask for permit to Regent and also to Minister of Forestry” he explained. “
In the hearing, petitioner also requested a permit to the Court for presents an expert for the upcoming session. It was approved by the board of Constitutional Justice which chaired by Achmad Sodiki, Vice Chief Justice of the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Indonesia. (Lulu Anjarsari/mh/YCP)
Wednesday, February 16, 2011 | 19:15 WIB 367