The trial continued against the testing of Act No. 8 of 1981 on Criminal Procedure Code or Criminal Code commonly known as the Constitutional Court held again on Tuesday (25/10), in the Plenary Room. Trial with this 65/PUU-Ix/2011 Number filed by Major (Pol.) Tjetje Iskandar.

In the hearing request repairs Constitutional Justice led by Muhammad Alim, the Applicant has made some improvements. Petitioner’s attorney, Albert Nadeak revealed Petitioner’s argument is to sharpen the advice of the Council of Judges Panel in a preliminary hearing. "Petitioners have omitted the provision that the previous petition we put," he explained.

Petitioner argues that his constitutional rights impaired by the enactment of Article 83 of the Criminal Procedure Code which states, "(1) The decision of the pretrial matters referred to in Article 79, Article 80 and Article 81 can not be appealed, (2) Exempted from the provisions of paragraph (1) is pretrial ruling that establishes invalidity termination of investigation or prosecution, which can be requested for the final decision to the High Court in the legal area concerned ". According to Petitioner, the article has also been led to discrimination.

Article 79 determines the demand for legal checks whether or not a proposed arrest or detention of suspects, family or their proxies to the chairman of the district court. While Article 80 states that a request for lawful checking whether or not a termination of the investigation or prosecution may be brought by the investigator or public prosecutor or the third party concerned to the chief district court. Article 81 determines matters relating to compensation and rehabilitation due to invalidity or both of these things posed by the suspect or third party concerned to the chief district court.

"This is what we asked violation of our constitutional rights and our rights, and discrimination under the Act of 1945. On that basis we submitted to the Constitutional Court. Secondly, we actually even though it has no provision for a grace period to appeal the case and the law says we are not allowed to appeal, we still make an appeal. And at the specified time limit that we’ve entered an appeal. In connection with that, we filed a judicial review to the Constitutional Court so presumably this Article may be revoked and enforced along all citizens, legal entities and individuals, "said Albert. (Lulu Anjarsari / mh/Yazid.tr)