Prohibition to use the state emblem of Garuda Pancasila should be explained in material and formal. It is delivered by the Dean of the Faculty of Philosophy of GMU Mukhtasar Syamsudin petition in court as expert testing of Act 24 of 2009 on the Flag, Language, and the State Emblem and National Anthem on Thursday (1/3) at the Plenary Court Room. Petition with the Court Clerk’s registered number 4/PUU-X/2012 is filed by the Legal and Constitutional Studies Forum (Petitioner I), Ryan Muhammad (Petitioner II), Bervilia Sari (Petitioner III), Erwin Agustian (Applicant IV), and Eko Santoso (Petitioners V).

"The symbol of state, especially Garuda Pancasila, from the two aspects of the causal point of view material that Garuda Pancasila state symbol originated from Indonesia. Of customs, cultures and from there came the aspiration to achieve its goal of creating a just and prosperous society based on Pancasila. Materially, the value of Pancasila which is in it is inappropriate and should be claimed to belong to the nation because it was originally sourced from Indonesia’s own national pride. For any intelligent creature, it can be considered to appreciate the creations in the form of symbols. Actually, the prohibition to use individual symbols must be explained in material and formal, "he explained in front of the judges of the Constitutional Court is headed by Deputy Chairman Achmad Sodiki.

According Mukhtasar, the symbol of symbols already contains the majesty of the governed without any human would respond as he thought the work or the fruit of God’s creatures. "Garuda Pancasila (is) a symbol of Indonesia where people appreciate each symbol is in it with pride that there is freedom to appreciate in the corridor to reach the goals you have in Garuda Pancasila itself," he explained.

On that occasion, the Government, represented by N. Anwar, said the Article 57 letter c and d Law. 24/2009 does not conflict with the 1945 Constitution as argued by the Applicant. "Act a quo would uphold the law and does not eliminate the right of every person in obtaining legal guarantees. Act a quo also does not eliminate the right of association and assembly for citizens, "he explained.

In the main petition, Wahyudi as legal counsel to explain the Petitioner was Petitioner violated his constitutional rights due to the enactment of Article 57 letter c and d Law. 24/2009. Article 57 letter c and d states, "Every person is prohibited from: ... (c) create a symbol for individuals, political parties, associations, organizations and / or the same company or emblem resembles the State, and (d) using the symbol of the State for purposes other than those stipulated in this Law ". According to Wahyudi, Petitioner IV and V applicant ever suspended sentence the court for 3 months due to the enactment of this Article.

"According to the petition, how to use the symbol of statehood is not for insulting the state symbol, but rather as a form of public expression of nationalism against the state emblem. Applicant uses only state symbol ‘Garuda Pancasila’ to stamp the applicant organization. And it was done as part of a sense of nationalism to the Petitioner, "he explained. (Lulu Anjarsari / mh/Yazid.tr)