Kant Kamal filed the review of Act No. 30 of 2004 concerning Notary, Friday (8/6). Session no. 49/PUU-X/2012 is chaired by Hamdan Zoelva as Chairman of the Constitutional Court Panel preliminary examination. At this time the hearing subjects exposed to a direct request by the attorney of Applicant, Thomson Situmeang. 

Exposure start points of the petition, Tomson said he felt so aggrieved by the enactment of the Notary, mainly due to the enactment of Article 66 paragraph (1) Law Notary. "The applicant felt the force of this section, all the states with the approval of the Regional Council of Trustees," said Tomson. He continued that he had made a police report in the Republic of Indonesia Police on entering false information into an authentic deed. But in the reporting process that led to the examination process, after investigators conduct examination of witnesses, examination of documentary evidence, and examination of the notary who makes authentic act is a new loss is felt Tomson. Because, in the investigator’s inspection process in accordance with Article 66 paragraph (1) is shared with the public prosecutor or judge authorized to call a notary public with approval of the Regional Assembly Supervisory. "However, after investigators asked for the approval of the Regional Supervisory Council does not give consent to examine the notary and thereafter no longer any remedy. So that the last information we collect, ranging from the difficulty that investigators bring SP2P notary is to be examined as a witness or a suspect may be increased because it is not approved by the Regional Council of Trustees and thereafter can not be made any effort," said Tomson of the losses sustained. It is not approved by the Supervisory Council of the Regional investigators to stop the investigation to the detriment of constitutional rights. Because the investigation is terminated, Thomson who felt it should still serve as a director of a company will lose its right to existence of the authentic deed. "Article 66 paragraph (1) of Law Number 30 Year 2004 concerning Notary, in particular phrases or sentences ‘with the approval of the Supervisory Council of Region’, we consider contrary to the Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia," Tomson close at the end of the explanation related to the subject of principal petition.

The judge’s advice

Already a duty panel of judges at the preliminary hearing in the Court to advise the applicant about what things needs to be improved. However, even given such liability, the panel of judges can not force the applicant to follow all the suggestions from the panel of judges Ahmad Fadlil Sumadi advised the Applicant to explore the arguments according to the Petitioner should not have the permission of or a recommendation from the organization. "What is the argument you do not need the recommendation of the organization? This argument is too low. If there were, you still focus on your client’s interests. But, the argument you are stating that the constraints are the argument that constitutional constraints are still relying on the report to your client’s rights, not to the decomposition of the argument about the need of recommendations," advises Fadlil. Zoelva also said the same thing with Fadlil that the applicant needs to sharpen reasonable substance and the reason the petition.”Although it is described here in general, but the important thing is the issue in this Court is where the conflict with the Article in the chapter Basic Law? That’s where the description. In this regard, the constitutional interests which must first be protected, will you?” Zoelva asked the things that was lacking in the substance of the petition. (Yusti Nurul Agustin / mh/Yazid.tr)