The trial of reviewing Act 22/2001 on Oil and Gas held back the Constitutional Court (MK) on Wednesday (26/6) in Plenary Session of the Constitutional Court case which is chaired by Number 36/PUU-X/2012 by Deputy Chief Justice of the Constitutional Court Achmad Sodiki petitioned by several community organizations and individuals, among them PP Muhammadiyah, Indonesia Hizb Siyasiyah Standing Committee, PP Union of Islamic Ummah, PP Syarikat Islam Indonesia, PP Muslim Brotherhood Indonesia, Al Ershad Al Islamiyah and other individual applicants.

In the trial, Deputy Minister Rudi Rubiandini opinion confirms the existence of a surplus of oil and gas to fuel subsidies in the budget. According to Rudi, the Financial Memorandum of 2012, written from the oil and gas revenues of Rp 220.4 trillion, while the expenditure of fuel subsidies amounting to Rp 123.6 trillion. "So yes there is a surplus amounting to Rp 98.6 trillion. However, the assumption (the government) make public deception is wrong and dramatized, "said Rudi.

According to Rudi, oil and gas revenues of Rp 220.4 trillion are used to fund the subsidies it is deceptive. Rudi explained oil and gas revenues are also used for other needs in the state budget. "The use of oil and gas resources to hold the fuel subsidy was still wrong because there is no planning in the State use commodities used for similar commodities, as it is used collectively for all commodities," he explained.

Income can be obtained from fuel sales of Rp 550 trillion, while for import, and processing the fuel to gas stations to Rp 555.8 trillion. "This shows a deficit of Rp 5.8 trillion. So, if national income is used for the needs listed in the budget, then the procurement of fuel, the state of the fund deficit will be more deficits if crude oil prices rose more than U.S. $ 105/barel, "he explained.

In response, the Constitutional Court on the question Harjono questioned the concept of subsidies. According to Harjono, cover fuel shortages in the country because Indonesia still can produce 930 thousand barrels of oil per day. "That there is, a reduction of the required, then this deficiency used to be subsidized. Shortcomings are still counted. When combined with the cost of lack of demand for oil and used as per requirement of the subsidy figure for what it is? "He asked.

Rudi said that domestic production of 930 thousand barrels, while the equivalent needs of this country is 1.4 million barrels. "So, the state is not only a position as a net importer, but we have become importers," he said.

In the main petition, Petitioner argued that Article 1 number 19 and 23, Article 3 letter b, Article 4 paragraph (3), Article 6 paragraph (1), Article 9 paragraph (1), Article 10 paragraph (1), Article 11 paragraph ( 2), Article 13 paragraph (1), and Article 44 paragraph (1) oil and gas law violates constitutional rights guaranteed by Article 1 paragraph (2), Article 11 paragraph (2), Article 20A paragraph (1), Article 28C paragraph (2), Article 28D paragraph (1), Article 28H Paragraph (1), and Article 33 paragraph (2) and (3) of the 1945 Constitution. According to Petitioners, the oil and gas law has been deemed demeaning and insulting the state sovereignty of the people as mandated by the Constitution. Therefore, the state has already resulted in the same position with foreign companies in oil and gas management contracts in Indonesia. (Lulu Anjarsari / mh/Yazid.tr)