Minor Parties To Review Eight Articles in Political Party Act
Image

Constitutional Justice Muhammad Alim (Head of Panel) accompanied by Constitutional Justice Maria Farida Indrati and Harjono (each as member) during the verification of petition for the review of Act No.2 of 2011 about the Amendment to Act No. 2 of 2008 on Political Parties, Thursday (24/2/2011).


Jakarta, MKOnline - Act on Political Parties was brought to The Constitutional Court (The Court) to be reviewed, Thursday (24/2/2011). The Act No.2/2011 about the Amendment to Act No. 2/2008 was registered with number 15/PUU-IX/2011. The Panel of Justices for the case was presided by Constitutional Justice Muhammad Alim and accompanied by Constitutional Justice Maria Farida Indrati and Harjono.

The articles pleaded to be reviewed were Article 2 paragraph (1), (1a), (4); Article 3 paragraph (1), (2a), (2b), (2c); Article 4 paragraph (1), (2), (3), (4); Article 5 paragraph (1), (2), (3), (4); Article 19 paragraph (3a); Article 32 paragraph (5); Article 33 paragraph (1) and Article 51 paragraph (1), (1a), (1b), (1c), (2), (4), (5).

The Petitioners were from minor parties that did not have their representatives in the House of Representatives. They were 1. PPD; 2. PBB; 3. PDS; 4. PKPI; 5. PDP; 6. PPPI ; 7. Partai Patriot; 8. PNBKI ; 9. PPI; 10. PMB; 11. Partai Pelopor 12. PKDI; 13. Partai Indonesia Baru; 14. PPDI; 15. PKPB; 17. PSI; dan 18. Partai Merdeka. While as their Legal Counsels were Suhardi Somomoeljono, Bambang Suroso, Didi Supriyanto, Ratna Ester L Tobing, dan Abdurrahman Tardjo.

The Petitioner argued that the articles above would blocked the non-parliamentary parties to participate in the 2014 election. “The party’s constitutional rights as guaranteed by the constitution will be damaged,” said Suhardi.

Article 51 for example, according to the Petitioners were damaging the rights of the parties. Political Parties were only given 2,5 years to do a verification. The Petitioners felt that the time was too short and was against the principles of legislation making. “This is also against the logics of law and politics concerning the efficiency pattern in managing a political party,” he added.

There was also a phrase in the articles which provided a stipulation that a political party was formed by at least 30 Indonesian citizens which was at least 21 years old or had been married in every province. “Article 3 paragraph (2c) concerning the management board in every province with at least 50 percent had caused the Petitioner to be treated unfairly. Every political party participating in the election has the same rights before the law. The Petitioners which have to be protected by the Act were in fact treated on the contrary. This is called depolitisation of political parties.” Explained by the Petitioners.
 
Responding to the arguments, Muhammad Alim said that the petitum asking for The Court to grant the entire petition would cause the Act to be unbinding. “Besides that, your conflicts, apart from against the Constitution, they are also against other Acts, and the authority of The Court is to review an Act against the Constitution. This has to be given attention, the conflict is not against other Acts but against the Constitution,” reminded Alim.

Meanwhile, Maria Farida saw this from the redaction; there were still a lot to be improved. “The articles should be in capital, paragraphs should be in lowercase and between brackets,” she advised. She also noticed that of the 32 legal counsels, only 5 people signed the petition. That would be a problem later on of who will be responsible. (Yazid/mh/YDJ)


Monday, February 28, 2011 | 14:02 WIB 198