Two experts from case No. 45/PUU-IX/2011 delivered testimony before the Panel, Tuesday (8 / 11). Both are the Criminal Law Expert Land and Forestry, Kurnia Toha and Executive Director of the Bureau of Forestry Law and Policy Consulting, Sadino.

Toha gift was given his first submit his statement before the Panel of Judges chaired by Deputy Chief Justice of the Constitutional Court, Achmad Sodiki. Toha said that the provisions of Article 1 number 3 of Law no. 41 of 1999 resulted in legal uncertainty because it can lead to differences of interpretation and lead to a violation of people’s rights and other government agencies because the process of setting forest area designated simply done with no need to go through the process in accordance with the principles of state law or the principles of due process of law.

Furthermore, Ugo Mattei Toha quoted stating that the land rights, among others, provide the right to control, the right to use, the right to manage, the right to earn a living, and the right to commercialize. Toha also Nicholas Mercuro quoted in his book "The Fundamental Interrelationship between Government and Property" stating that the material rights, including rights to land do not make much sense if it is not clearly defined and uncertain. "If it is not clear, it will cause the absence of collateral and will cause conflicts in society," said Toha. 

From these various opinions, Toha said that the material or property rights to new rights have meaning and can be implemented if there is security, protection, and legal certainty. As for guarantees, still according to Toha, protection and legal certainty if there are new protections from the government through clear rules and the protection of law enforcement.

At the end of his explanation, Toha said, provisions of Article 1 number 3, in particular the phrase "designated and / or defined" forest areas has resulted in the appointment of the same legal force with the establishment of forest area. That caused the lack of legal certainty, security, protection and violation of justice which is the major joints of the state law. "Accordingly, the provisions of Article 1 paragraph 3 of Act No. 41 of 1999 contrary to Article 1 paragraph 3 of the Constitution of 1945," said Toha.

In line with Toha, Expert of the second applicant, Sadino said that the current forestry issues are very complex and the necessary legal certainty for all parties. Local Government in all districts in Central Kalimantan according to Sadino, constitutional rights violations suffered in a structured and systemic due to the Ministry of Forestry does not prioritize the implementation of the inaugural forests are mandated by legislation and according to technical rules of forestry, such as stating the designation and establishment of a legal effect which the same.

During this time, further Sadino, to establish the forest area used the Decree of the Minister of Agriculture of 1982 as its foundation. In fact, the decision letter was not mentioned in Law No. 5 Year 1967 on Basic Provisions of Forestry. "Act No. 5 of 1967 only recognized the establishment of forest area. Although Law No. 5 Year 1967 has been replaced by Law Number 41 Year 1999 regarding Forestry still has not seen any improvement on the decision letter referred to the Minister of Agriculture, "said Sadino. (Yusti Nurul Agustin / mh/Yazid.tr)