The Constitutional Court uses a variety of methods or multiple methods each take a decision. Therefore, using these methods, the Court has actually done what you want by Pancasila. So that was delivered by Chairman of the Constitutional Court, Moh. Mahfud MD as a guest speaker in the Focus Group Discussion with the theme "Law Enforcement Reform in Indonesia" organized by the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security, Wednesday (12/10), at the Hotel Sari Pan Pacific, Jakarta.

Pancasila was never to any one theory or method, and not to one of the country, and not also the socialist, capitalist, communist, or liberal."Pancasila that’s the bottom line is human, honoring Pancasila means humanize humans. Thus a system of Pancasila Indonesia did not come to there to here, but take the good aspects, "said Mahfud.

Mahfud MD also said that the Constitutional Court was formed to uphold the constitution with the aim of the constitution can be enforced in accordance with the intent and purpose of the constitution, especially guarding the consistency of legislation, both the regulatory level of the central and local regulations. "That is why the Court said as bodyguard’s constitution," said Mahfud.

In addition, Mahfud MD also said that there are many views on the constitution of the change. Some say good, some say bad. "But for the Court, any contents of the constitution should be regarded as a constitutional right. And, the Court has never questioned the konstiusi is right or wrong, just that now it is completely valid, "he said.

If one argues that the constitution is bad and should be changed, said Mahfud MD, then it should be modified by the People’s Consultative Assembly (MPR) or institution authorized for that, then the Court again following the results of that change. "Why so, because the Court did not want to be involved in the 1945 issue is right or wrong. Anyway, that applies it will be escorted by the Court, "he explained.

In addition to the speaking position of the Constitutional Court in guarding the constitution, Mahfud MD also said that in the 1945 Constitution, the Constitutional Court has four powers, and an obligation that is, to test the Act (the Act) against the 1945 Constitution, rule on the dispute the authority of state institutions, to decide the dissolution of political parties, and decide upon disputes on general election results. While the obligation of the Court is to give decision on the opinion of the House of Representatives that the President and / or Vice President is alleged to have violated the law in an act of treason, corruption, bribery, other felonies, or moral turpitude, and / or no longer qualify as President and / or Vice President as set forth in the 1945 Constitution.

Responding to a question from one of the participants related to whether the Court did not decide concrete cases? According to Mahfud, many concrete cases decided by the Court, but not in the Testing Act. The concrete case is concerned to the case of the General Election, and all concrete. "Therefore, the Court did not decide concrete cases related to judicial review, never, and should not be," he said.

Gayus Lumbuun, as participant discussion, asks relevant cases The Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK). "Where the concrete case," he asked. Mahfud MD said that the KPK case has been canceled. The legislation is if any commissioner had died or stopped, to be replaced soon. But the role in the Act is not mentioned, including if the substitute is to continue or not is not clear. "But in another article mentioned members of the KPK 4 (four) years in office," said Mahfud.

Then Mahfud MD pointed out in case it is Busyro Muqoddas as Chairman of the KPK. In such cases, the Court must choose, because there are two alternatives that are equally strong. "Then the case was submitted to the Constitutional Court, while within the law when judges decide, it has to be followed, regardless there who do not agree or disagree," said Mahfud MD.

In addition to Mahfud MD, another speaker at the event was Minister of Justice and Human Rights Patrialis Akbar and National Resilience Institute Governor Muladi. The discussion was attended dozens of national leaders and state officials, both from the House of Representatives, Police, Advocates, NGOs, and academics. (Shohibul Umam / mh/Yazid.tr)