Police placement directly under the President and Chief of Police appointment by the President with the approval of House of Representatives (DPR) is not based on the Constitution or no foothold to the provisions of the 1945 Constitution. So that was submitted by the Petitioners is A. Muhammad Asrun, Dorel Almir, and Merlina, in the Hearing Panel Repair Petition, the Constitutional Court, Monday (17/10).

Panel Session chaired by Moh. Mahfud MD, Maria Farida Indrati and Harjono. They are respectively as members. The Petitioner argues that the fifth Article, namely Article 2, Article 8, Article 11, Article 14 Paragraph (1) letter d, letter g, letter j, letter l, and Article 15 Paragraph (1) letter c, letter d, letter k, and Paragraph (2) letter a, letter c, and the letter k in the Act (Act) No. 2 of 2002 on the Police of the Republic of Indonesia against the 1945 Constitution.

The petitioners also said the applicant was a legal position related to law enforcement in Indonesia. This is related to a complaint by the police occurred in the handling of reports and progress reports. "Therefore, people feel aggrieved and suffered losses due to the organizers constitutional state is not constitutional in connection with the filing of a quo case," said Asrun as one applicant.

Petitioners further say that the concrete harm to the Police Department under President is associated with police services. Thus, the chain is too long, if also must submit a complaint to the President as the Chief of Police boss. For example is the case of former Registrar of the Court Zaenal Arifin Hoesin as a suspect case of a false letter of the Constitutional Court. "The complaint was delivered in stages up to the President, but there is also no response from President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono," explained the Petitioners.

Petitioner added that some checks Zaenal Arifin Hoesin in the House of Representatives and the Criminal Investigation Police Headquarters as a indication of the involvement of Andi Nurpati Former Member of The Corruption Eradication Commission and Arsyad Sanusi as a former Judge of the Constitutional Court related to a fake letter. However, according to Petitioner, because the position as one of Andi Nurpati DPP Chairman of the ruling Democratic Party and the President under the target, then the police inaction seemed to set Andi Nurpati as one of the suspects in the case of a false letter of the Constitutional Court.

Then, the Petitioners also cite the case of engineering leadership criminalization of the Corruption Eradication Commission Bibit Samad Rianto and Chandra M. Hamzah, the police investigation raises the noise level due to public opposition to the legal process which was considered erroneous and unfounded. "But the president did not ask Chief of Police to stop the process, even if the President understands the problem cases," said Asrun.

Therefore, the Petitioners requested that the Law No. 2 of 2002, or at least stated, "Article 2, Article 8, Article 11, Article 14 paragraph (1) letter d, letter g, letter j, letter l, and Article 15 paragraph letter (1) letter c, letter d, letter k, and paragraph (2) letter a, letter c and k, have no binding legal force, "pleaded the Petitioners.

In the end of the trial, Moh. Mahfud MD called on the community, NGOs, as well as legal unions or organizations, if you want to set yourself as a Related Party, or felt compelled by this court. "Because of this law is very important for the future of our state constitution, I think it should be widespread and comprehensive," said Chairman of the Constitutional Court. (Shohibul Umam / mh/Yazid.tr)