Judicial review of the final decision of the Constitutional Court related provisions contained in Article 10 Paragraph (1) of the Constitutional Court against the 1945 Constitution that were reviewed by the Salim Alkatiri as a doctor in case number has been entered 69/PUU-IX/2011 pronunciation trial verdict. The Court declared the application is not acceptable. Moh. Mahfud MD as Chairman of the Panel was accompanied by other constitutional judges in the Plenary Room, Wednesday (21/12) afternoon.

Court in its consideration of the petition stating that Article 10 paragraph (1) of theapplication that contains similarities with the case number has been disconnected129/PUU-VII/2009, dated February 2, 2010, and the decision 36/PUU-IX/2011numbers, dated August 23, 2011, which later became the legal considerations in the decision 46/PUU-IX/2011 number, date of 1 November 2011, namely the authority of the Court.

Therefore, to consider this petition, the need to first refer to the legal considerations in the third decision, the Court tested the material if the articles are filed in the request, then it implies that the Court will also examine the material contained in Article 24C paragraph (1) UUD 1945, which means the Court will test the constitutionality of the 1945 material. "In such a case is not a constitutional authority of the Court because of the existence of the articles of the 1945 Constitution is the option of the maker of the 1945 Constitution," wrote the Court. That because the Court is not authorized, then the corresponding position of the principal applicant and the application is not considered anymore.

In his petition, Petitioner questioned the Article 10 paragraph (1) that is considered contrary to the 1945 Constitution, especially Article 28I paragraph (2) and Article 27 paragraph (1). Petitioner also requested, among others, contained in Article 10 paragraph (1) in order to be subject again to the Independent Panel of Judges, because it had violated God’s revelation. (Shohibul Umam / mh/Yazid.tr)