The trial of Act No. 15 of 2011 on the Election organizers against the 1945 Constitution finally held for the first time at the Plenary Meeting Room, 2nd Floor Court House, on Wednesday (8/2).Session Panel, chaired by the Chief Judge, M. Akil Mochtar was only attended by the legal counsel to the Petitioner, Veri Junaidi. On that occasion, Veri convey the subject petition of the Petitioners.

Applicant in more detail to the submission of the test of Article 13 paragraph (5), Article 15 paragraph (4), subsection (5), paragraph (6), and paragraph (7), Article 87 paragraph (5), Article 89 paragraph (4 ), subsection (5), paragraph (6), and paragraph (7) Implementation of Election Law. And, the applicant who filed the testing of these articles, namely Yuliandri (Lecturer Legislation UNAND), Zainal Arifin Mukhtar (Lecturer of the State Administration of UGM), Charles Simabura (Lecturer and Researcher of Pusako), and the Society for General Elections and Democracy (Perludem ). The applicant is actually accompanied by four lawyers, the Feri Amsari, Khairul Fahmi, Veri Junaidi, and Donal Fariz.

Veri read out in the introduction, the applicant considers a change or a change of election law by the parliament and government has led to legal uncertainty in the process of electing members of the General Elections Commission (KPU). It will then adversely affect the independence and professionalism of the Commission as an election that results in a conflict with the Constitution of 1945, primarily related to Article 13 paragraph (5), Article 15 paragraph (4), subsection (5), paragraph (6), and paragraph (7), Article 87 paragraph (5), Article 89 paragraph (4), subsection (5), paragraph (6), and paragraph (7) Organizing Elections Act.

Veri further said that the establishment and filling of positions in state institutions conducted for the purpose of state. Thus, if a state agency fails to carry out its functions it will have an impact on the realization of national interests. "That is, the failure of the functioning of the organs of state, including state institutions, will cause the failure of state goals, so that the most disadvantaged citizens. In other words, the Petitioners have failed to realize losses in the values of constitutionalism, "said Veri.

Moreover, the applicants have some work as a lecturer of constitutional importance to the legal norms that regulate the charging position the branches of state power, including the election organizers, free from irregularities to the state administration to function properly. While the applicant in the form of organization, Perludem, said Veri also suffered losses with the enactment of constitutional provisions such. Because the Perludem as an organization can act on behalf of public interest in conducting and promoting the general electoral democracy in Indonesia. And the enactment of these articles that harm citizens, Perludem also felt aggrieved by the enactment of these articles. 

Principal Application

One argument of the applicant related to Article 13 paragraph (5) Implementation of Election Law is contradictory to Article 28D paragraph (1) of the 1945 Constitution because it is contrary to the provisions of the spirit of the establishment of an independent election organizers. "The idea of organizing an independent election must be realized through an independent process as well. Give space to the House to participate in every stage of selection by the selection team will obviously give effect to the selection of election process, "said Veri.

Veri then continued that the authorities establish the candidate selection team member of the Commission is the authority of the president in accordance with Article 12 paragraph (1) of Election Organizers. As the party was formed and or appointed by the president, the principal task of the Commission Member Candidate Selection Team is helping the president to set a prospective member of the Commission to be submitted to Parliament.

Article 13 paragraph (5) the applicant also argued that the law contains ambiguities lead to legal uncertainty. Ambiguity arises because the law in Article 13 of Law Election Organizers of any conflict between the provisions of paragraph one with the other verses. "In Article 13 paragraph (3) k letter expressly stated that the selection team delivered 14 (fourteen) the name of a candidate member of the Commission to the President. Obligation of selection team was to give 14 (fourteen) the name of a candidate member of the Commission to the President is a consequence of the assignment given to the President of the selection team. While the Article 13 paragraph (5) it appears a provision requiring the implementation of the selection team selection process to submit a report to the House of Representatives, "said Veri. (Yusti Nurul Agustin/Yazid.tr)