Last Statement of the Parties in Dispute of Newmont divestment
Image


Case authority dispute of state institutions (SKLN) submitted by the President through the Minister of Finance and Minister of Justice and Human Rights (Applicant) in the Constitutional Court on Tuesday (8/5) entering the eighth session. The trial is listening to expert testimony / witness and also the delivery of closing statement (closing statement) from each of the litigants.

In this 2/SKLN-X/2012 pekara number, Petitioners dispute with the House of Representatives and the State Audit Board, each acting as Respondent I and II. The issue raised is the purchase of 7% stake of PT.Newmont Nusa Tenggara (PT NNT) by the Government.

Given the initial opportunity Finance Minister Agus DW Martowardojo. In his closing statement, he said the process of settlement of purchase 7% stake in PT NNT divestment there is a difference of opinion between Petitioner and Respondent I and II. "The petitioners argued that the applicant can only make a purchase of shares divestment of PT. NNT after obtaining the prior consent of the Respondent I, "said the Minister of Finance.

But assessing the Applicant, continued Agus, with the opinion of Respondent I and II Respondent, the Petitioner is hampered in performing its constitutional authority in obtaining benefits for the prosperity of the people of Indonesia. "If the implementation of the Budget (Budget of the State) are still required approval by the House again, then it will lead to the approval of a layered," he explained.

Besides responding to the purchase of shares related to the inhibition of having to seek approval, the Applicant in this regard has also been considered that the Respondent II has interpreted the statute, and not carries it out. "In the examination report, the CPC has interpreted the provisions of Article 24 paragraph (7) State Finance Law which means CPC has exceeded its authority," he said.

The applicant was denied a direct statement by the Chairman CPC CPC Hadi Purnomo. In his closing statement he said that the applicant believes CPC had "misinterpreted" the provisions of Article 24 paragraph (7) of Law 17/2003. "We reiterate that the CPC does not assess a policy and / or interpret legislation and regulations, but the CPC is only to check and assess compliance with the government on the implementation of laws and regulations in the process of purchasing shares in PT NNT (closed)," explained the chairman of the CPC.

In the meantime, he believes that if the finance ministry does not require the permission of the House of Representatives in the purchase of 7% stake in PT NNT by PIP (Government Investment Center), should be checked during the examination may file rejection. "But when receiving and inspection procedures to follow all the LHP (Inspection Report) was published, the CPC must be followed up LHP (final and binding) as per Section 23E of the 1945 Constitution," said Hadi.

And the last to purchase shares of 7% PT NNT by PIP, Hadi Purnomo reiterated that the CPC does not prohibit the government had to buy a 7% stake in PT NNT (Closed), "along the corridor through the procedures and laws / regulations," he explained.

Parliament was also reinforcing the statement of Respondent II. In view of the end, which is represented by Nusron Wahid of the Golkar faction said that if the government does not recognize the performance of duties, functions, and authority are carried out by the House and the CPC, it is the right of the government. However, he argues, the constitution has mandated that the results of an examination conducted by the CPC shall be conducted by a state agency in this government. "It’s not a way to bring this matter to the Constitutional Court," explained Nusron.

Nusron also stressed that essentially the relationship between the government and the parliament is a relationship of political institutions (checks and balances), so what impact if there is no agreement on a political decision between the government and the government brought Parliament to the Constitutional Court?” This will be a major problem in governance and have a devastating impact," he said.

Previously, also heard testimony from Petitioner Eddy experts Suratman, and experts from the Respondent II Irman Putra Sidin, and the Applicant witness Arif Hidayat. One of them Suratman Eddy said that the purchase of shares in PT NNT to increase state revenue from dividends, taxes, and royalties. In addition, he said, this purchase also ensures compliance with the company to implement the rules. (Shohibul Umam / mh/Yazid.tr)


Tuesday, May 08, 2012 | 21:07 WIB 168