---

The Constitutional Court (MK) opened the first or preliminary hearing to test the Act (Puu) No. 17 of 2003 on State Finance and Law. 1 of 2004 on State Treasury to the 1945 Constitution on Wednesday (16/5). The trial was attended two of the three applicant’s preliminary examination. Both applicants were present, and Denni Fhatoni Muhammad delivered the reasons of their application before the panel of judges chaired by Harjono.

The applicant stated that they specifically request testing of article 8 letter d State Finance Law and Article 7 paragraph (2) letter j and Article 38 paragraph (1) of the State Treasury. The applicant also said when introducing myself, actually consists of three people Applicant, namely Muhammad Fhatoni (Applicant 1), Akmal Fuadi (Applicant 2), and Denni (applicant 3). Unfortunately, Akmal Fuadi could not attend the hearing this time.

Without his attorney, Denni explained that there are substantive differences and contradictions between the norms tested by the 1945 Constitution. Opposition that led to the loss of rights and the constitutional authority of the Petitioners. "According to the Petitioners, Article 11 paragraph (2) Constitution has specifically mentioned that the first president to make treaties. Secondly, the agreement which will produce an extensive and fundamental impact on the lives of the people associated with the financial burden of the state. The third, must be approved by Parliament. While on the other hand, the Article 8 point d State Finance Law specifically mentions ‘the Minister of Finance to the international agreements’. The second is in the financial sector. Similarly, in Article 7 paragraph (2) item j mentioned State Treasury Law that the finance minister can do and provide guarantees on behalf of the government," said Denni explain the reasons for their request.

It is also contained in Article 38 paragraph (1) of the State Treasury stating that the authorized officer on behalf of the Minister of Finance to hold debt that comes from abroad.

According to the Petitioners, these articles are petitioned for review by the applicant against the principle of prudence in terms of foreign debt as a burden that will produce broad and fundamental impact on people’s lives. "Your Honor, since invited legislating Article 8 item d State Finance Law and Article 7 paragraph (2) item j and Article 38 paragraph (1) of the State Treasury has increased the national debt. This means increasing the national debt and increasing burden is clearly connected to the presence of Indonesia in the future. Indonesia’s foreign debt will still be paid up to 50 years. Simply put, a debt that was signed today, use today, spent this year. But what then are the children and grandchildren to pay the applicant and all of our children," said Denni about the losses suffered by the Petitioners.

 

Judge suggestion

As in the preliminary hearing on matters that go to the table the Constitutional Court hearing, the judges panel shall advise the applicant. These suggestions can then be used by the applicant to correct the petition or not used at all will not matter.

Harjono, chairman of the panel shall recommend that the applicant consider the application structure. "The authority of the Constitutional Court so that later you actually are referring to the provisions of the Constitutional Court has the authority to make it. Yes, this last there, just try to set a bit later full back soon, "Harjono suggestion, adding that the applicant look at judicial review requests that have been sued in Court to" emulate "the structure of the application by Denni et al.

Anwar Usman, a member of the panel of judges in the trial also provides advice to the applicant. Among others, Anwar regarding the composition of the petition is not clear how many petitum is. Anwar also stressed that the fig applicant should elaborate more deeply about the losses due to the enactment of constitutional provisions which filed a quo to be tested by the applicant. "Then I want to emphasize again, it should be the applicant to elaborate on it some more losses due to the enactment of provisions that were tested by the applicant and of course also related to the articles of the stone used in the 1945 trial," Anwar’s advice.

Maria Farida Indrati while also acting as a member of the panel of judges in this trial suggest that the Petitioners explain in more detail about the rights accountability (legal standing) of the Petitioners. "For this application, you need to advance your legal standing. Who you are? You are an Indonesian citizen, yes, but then, your constitutional rights are affected by what law? "Maria said as she put forward suggestions for the improvement of constructive criticism petition. (Yusti Nurul Agustin / mh/Yazid.tr)

---