Some teachers and high school students of Tugu Ibu, Depok, had been to the Constitutional Court on Friday (10/2) morning. They were welcomed by Chief Staff Rafiuddin Munis Tamar.

On that occasion, Rafi, he used to be called, gave a brief lecture on the Constitution, State Institutions, and the authority of the Court. Rafi started the discussion by explaining the constitutional system of Indonesia in general, and then go to the explanation of state institutions.

According to Rafi, when talking about a state institution, there are at least two definitions. "It could be tight, it could also large," he said. If only the institutions of state institutions mentioned explicitly in the Constitution of 1945 only. While the broad or loose, if it means the opposite, i.e. not only those mentioned in the Constitution.

Furthermore, Rafi also talks about the authority of the Court. He said the Constitutional Court and the Supreme Court has a different authority. "The Court only hears matters related to state administration," he explained.

Rafi continued that Court has the authority and the obligation of four. Four authorities are testing the constitutionality of the law, resolve disputes of authority between state agencies, hearing disputes election results (including the head), and dissolve political parties. While the obligation is an obligation to give a decision against the opinion of the House of Representatives that the President and / or vice president has violated the law as determined by the Constitution.

According to Rafi, reviewing the act can be performed based on the loss of the constitutional party whose constitutional rights are recognized and protected by the 1945 Constitution. Therefore, he said, if you feel aggrieved by any of the norms of law, does not need demonstration. But it is tested to the Constitutional Court."Demo did not change the law," he said half-jokingly.

While in judging disputes election results, says Rafi, who sued the other candidate is not considered cheating or breaking the law. However, that should have sued the General Elections Commission that establishes the prospective winner. In this case, the Commission considered being the respondent.

Rafi then continued his explanation by describing the other authorities of Court by the opening session of questions. The students also seemed keen to put forward questions at the meeting. (Dodi / mh/Yazid.tr)