Democratization of broadcasting can only be realized through ownership diversity (diversity of ownership) and the diversity of broadcast content (diversity of content). It is delivered by a lecturer FIKOM UNISBA Santi Indra Astuti further testing at a hearing of Law Number 32 Year 2002 on Broadcasting to be held on Tuesday (13/3), at the Plenary Court Room. Cases registered with the Court Clerk No. 78/PUU-IX/2011 is filed by the Alliance of Independent Journalists (AJI), the Legal Aid Press (LBH Pers), Media Link, Media Monitoring Regulations and regulators (PR2Media), and the Foundation for Twenty-Eight .

"Allow me to quote Splichal (1993, in Gazali et al, 2003) which states that the democratization of broadcasting can only be realized through ownership diversity (diversity of ownership) and the diversity of broadcast content (diversity of content). Without the existence of such diversity, the broadcasting world will forever be under the pressure of the capitalists and investors who only want protection for the investment that has been embedded. Being task-appropriate academics like I limitation disciplines am I in, to urge and remind everyone that the efforts of the Broadcasting Act regulation of commercial broadcasting industry that has not been shown to seriously pursue the quality of delivery of the broadcast program is something that can threaten the democratization of broadcasting, "said Santi in Justices of the Constitutional Assembly, chaired by Chief Justice of the Constitutional Court, Moh. Mahfud MD. He was accompanied by other constitutional judges.

Meanwhile, experts from MK, Effendi Ghazali said the litigants in this court are a victim of the rating system in Indonesia that has never been audited. According to Effendi, if only on rating and sharing, it would require a measurement of rating agencies and sharing it truly can be audited. "And this does not happen.' National stupidity lasted so long while in countries like the United States that many so-called by the lecturers I had been going on since 1960. Congress can not just say things like this, we must establish a media council for rating this media to be very careful at all, "he explained.

Effendi explained during the seminar tour to Indonesia, none of the participants who raised their hands when asked the respondents had experience of these rating agencies. Yet once again, continued Effendi, is very important for the regulation to prevent monopoly or the perception of public opinion. "So my position is not in a position to say that one person or legal entity must not have more than one television station in one city, or in a networked context, not in that position. I just want to say people should honestly admit whether he has company or not? And when the stock moves did he have to explain, anyone who owns stock last? And if it for example has moved, he must hand them over to the Indonesian Broadcasting Commission. Whether he should have more than one station in a city? Must be checked also its origin, "he explained.

Experts of the Related Party Erman Rajagukguk presented in determining a company or two companies together have a monopoly of the airwaves should be analyzed rule of reason approach. For that, Erman, must be determined in advance the product and territorial market for television broadcasting. "In conclusion, if one company controls up to three television stations or the two firms merged to master six television stations, it can not be said to control television broadcasts in Indonesia, or a monopoly of the airwaves in Indonesia," he explained.

In the main petition, the Petitioner, represented by legal counsel Hendrayana, ask for judicial review of Article 18 paragraph (1) and Article 34 paragraph (4) of Law No.32/2002 on Broadcasting against Article 28D paragraph (1), Article 28F, and Article 33 paragraph (3 ) of the 1945 Constitution. According to Petitioners, these passages are multiple interpretations, giving rise to injustice and legal uncertainty. In addition, the Petitioners argue that the articles eliminating the principles, objectives, functions, and the principle of broadcasting that is contrary to Article 28F of the 1945 Constitution. (Lulu Anjarsari / mh/Yazid.tr)