The Constitutional Court (MK) held preliminary hearing matters Dispute Authority of the State Institutions (SKLN) of the Working Committee of Indonesian Advocates (KKAI) with the Supreme Court (MA) - Case No. 5/SKLN - IX/2011 - on Wednesday (2 / 11) in the courtroom of the Constitutional Court. In the trial, KKAI as Petitioner was to review the material against Article 36 of Act no. 3 / 2009 on the Second Amendment Act 14/1985 on the Supreme Court. 

Petitioner argues that pursuant to Law no. 18/2003 on Advocates stated "The Supreme Court handed the card issuing authority such as advocate by the advocate organization, movement or mutation advocate shall be notified to the bodies referred to advocate organization, in this case KKAI to supervise and appoint lawyers in accordance with the Advocate Law ..." 

Thus, according to Petitioner, the authority of the Supreme Court (Respondent) has been clearly acknowledged the existence of the Working Committee of Indonesian Advocates (KKAI) as the agency has the authority as the executive organ of state Advocate Law. 

However, the Petitioner further, it is still attached to the supervision of the Supreme Court and the Government as provided for in Article 36 of Law no. 3 / 2009 on the Second Amendment Law. 14/1985 on the Supreme Court, which reads, "The Supreme Court and the Government shall supervise the attorneys and notaries." 

According to Petitioner, the provisions of Article 36 Supreme Court Act is a barrier function in executing the organization KKAI advocate, said article is contrary to the 1945 and have no binding legal force, so that its advocates including KKAI detached, independent, and independent from the supervision of MA and the Government . 

Petitioner further explained that when the names of the advocates of swearing KKAI not apply to the Respondent, the Respondent was first issued Letter No..089/KMA/VI/2010 dated June 25, 2010. jo No.052/KMA/HK.01/III/2011 Letter from the Chairman of the Supreme Court dated March 23, 2011, as if the Respondent has the authority to regulate lawyers professional organizations include the name PERADI (Indonesian Advocates Association) and KAI (Indonesian Advocate Congress). 

Petitioner asserts, the Respondent issued a second letter was beyond the powers conferred by the 1945 Constitution. The organization of PERADI and KAI was not found in the Advocates Act, meaning outside the system of Advocates Act. In other words, not one soul with Article 32 paragraph (3) Law no. 18/2003 on Advocates. 

"For so-called professional organizations advocate provided for in Article 1 paragraph (4) Law no. 18/2003 on Advocates is KKAI. Therefore, the existence of KAI PERADI and create legal uncertainty with violating a person’s rights, in this case the lawyers or groups, in this case KKAI, not to obtain justice at the expense of constitutional rights as a state institution, "explained at length Applicant . 

In addition, says Petitioner, Respondent a letter specifying the name PERADI and KAI is a form of discrimination, as well as intervention by inhibiting the Applicant in performing the function of advocate organizations, in this case KKAI as a state institution. (Nano Tresna A. / mh/Yazid.tr)