Drs. Suroyo Alimoeso (Director-General of Land Transportation and Dr. Mualimin Abdi, S.H., M.H (Director-General of Litigation of Ministry of Law and Human Right) on behalf of government on judicial review of Act 22/2009 on Traffic and Public Transport [Article 7, Article 96, Article 262 paragraph (1) point f, and Article 263 paragraph (3)] held in court room of the Constitutional Court building, Thursday (17/2/2011).
Jakarta, MKOnline – Review of Act 22/2009 on Traffic and Public Transport [Article 7, Article 96, Article 262 paragraph (1) point f, and Article 263 paragraph (3)] held in plenary room of the Constitutional Court building. The court hearing was led by Achmad Sodiki accompanied by 6 other justices, except the Constitutional Court Chief Justice Mahfud MD who was in Yogya, and also M. Arsyad Sanusi.
The Plenary Hearing was scheduled to hear the explanation of government, House of Representatives and witness/expert of the petitioner and government. The case number 43/PUU-VII/2010 was requested by M. Husain Umajohar. Meanwhile from the government was attended by Irjen Pol. Joko Susilo, Kombes Indrajid, Kombes Agung Budi, Kombes Dr. Krisnanda, Kombes Giri Purwanto, Kombes Yahya, Kombes Budi Setiadi, Drs. Suroyo Alimoeso (Director-General of Land Transportation), Umar Aris (Head of Law Bureau KSLN), Sudirman Lambali (Director of Transportation Traffic) Mualimin Abdi (Director of Litigation), Heni Susila Wardaya (Kasubdit of Litigation), Liana Sari (Kasi of Litigation), Radita Aji, Toni Prayoga, Titis Aditya, Rini Octriyani, Yulanto Araya, Martanto (Korlantas), dan Sri Utomo (industrial department). Meanwhile there was none from the House of Representatives.
The Petitioner in the Hearing made request to review the stipulation of articles which regulate traffic and transport violation. For example, the petitioner set question about the stipulation of article 263 paragraph (3) “The official investigator as mentioned in paragraph (1) has obligation to submit bundle of traffic and transportation case investigation including the evidence material to the Court trough the investigator of the Police of Republic of Indonesia”. The petitioner considered this article doesn’t give clear distribution of authority.
Soroyo Alimoeso who gave explanation on behalf of government in the trial clarified the petition of petitioner is not clear, not explicit, and absurd. “The petitioner asked Constitutional Court to refuse the petition, accept the stipulation of government, and clarify the Law is constitutional ,” asked Suroyo.
Meanwhile, Syaidina Ali (Expert of the Petitioner), given the opportunity to state his opinion, clarified the Law (particularly the articles which were reviewed) is considered dominative in the policy. Article 7 paragraph (1) in the Law mentioned “The implementation of Traffic and Transportation in the service activity to society is committed by Government, Local Government, corporate body, and/or society.”
Then, Article 7 paragraph (2) mentioned “The implementation of Traffic and Transportation by Government as mentioned in paragraph (1) is committed according to the main duty and function of each institution which include: a. governmental affairs in street sector by State Ministry which responsible on street sector; b. governmental affairs in the sector of means and infrastructure of Traffic and Transportation by State Ministry which responsible on the sector of means and infrastructure of Traffic and Transportation; c. governmental affairs in the sector of developing the industry of Traffic and Transportation by State Ministry which responsible in the sector of industry; d. governmental affairs in the sector of technology development of Traffic and Transportation by State Ministry which responsible on the sector of technology development; and e. governmental affairs in the sector of Registration and Identification of Vehicles and Drivers, Law Enforcement, Operational Management and Traffic Engineering, also education on Traffic by the Police of Republic of Indonesia”.
Other article which’s requested is Article 262 paragraph (1) point f, mentioned “Committing confiscation of passing test license and/or license of operational public transportation on the violation as mentioned in point a, point b, and point c by making and signing investigation report”. According Syaidina Ali as an Expert, this article doesn’t show clear authority distribution of government community, and also too arbitrary to process of law in transportation operation. (Yazid/mh/Donny)
Thursday, February 17, 2011 | 12:17 WIB 465