---

Judicial Review of the Law on Road Traffic and Transportation No. 22 of 2009 which was reviewed by Saipul Jamil at the Constitutional Court on Friday (6/7), has entered the hearing improvement. On this occasion, Saipul back to sharpen his petition that he appealed to the Court that the Traffic Act in particular Article 310 to be interpreted more clearly.

"Petitioners ask the Court to give a more specific interpretation of Article 310 of Law No. 22/2009 on Road Traffic along the phrase ‘negligence’ and ‘others," explained attorney Saipul Jamil, Santoso when reading the petition the petition before the Constitutional Assembly, the Meeting Room of the Constitutional Court Panel.

The reason, the phrase "negligence" the Act a quo does not provide a definition or explanation of under what conditions and how a person can be stated for negligence. Phrase, said RM Tito Hananto K as attorney of the other, also not provided for in Article 359 of the Criminal Code (Book of the Criminal Justice Act). "So in the criminal law legislation in Indonesia do not have an official definition of what constitutes negligence," said Tito.

By not clearly interpreted, legal counsel to the Petitioner, assessing the phrase "negligence" in the article a quo could lead to a broader interpretation by law enforcement. It thus can be detrimental to Petitioner, because there is no legal certainty regarding the definition of the phrase "negligence". "The applicant only victim in an incident that occured Traffic accident due to factors outside of the power itself, so that the applicant otherwise inappropriate conduct" negligence, "the attorney said.

According to Petitioners, the phrase "negligence" is defined exactly fitting in what circumstances and how it can be defined as an act of "negligent". For instance, the state of people who consume addictive susbstance, alcoholic beverages, and narcotics is less of consciousness.

However, the Applicant prior to the occurrence of traffic accidents on the 3rd of September 2011 which caused the death of the Petitioner’s wife, Virginia Anggraeni it, do not consume addictive substances, alcoholic beverages, and drugs which lead to loss of consciousness.

On the other hand, the phrase "others" listed in Article 310 paragraph (4) the Act a quo, according to the attorney of the other applicants, R. Sidauruk, nor is there an official explanation about who is meant by "other people". "(A) the phrase ‘the other’, the applicant also is his constitutional rights," said Sidauruk.

The provisions of the Act a quo Article 310 paragraph (1) has noted, "Every person who was driving negligently Motor Vehicle Traffic Accidents resulting in damage to vehicles and / or goods referred to in Article 229 paragraph (2), shall be punished with imprisonment 6 (six) months and / or a fine of 1,000,000, 00 (one million rupiah). "

While subsection (2) also has said, "Every person who was driving negligently, Motor Vehicle Traffic Accidents resulting in minor injuries and damage to vehicles and / or goods referred to in Article 229 paragraph (3), shall be punished with imprisonment 1 (one) year and / or a fine of not more Rp2.000.000, 00 (two million dollars). "

And paragraph (3) states, "Any person driving a motor vehicle negligently, resulting in traffic accidents with severe injuries referred to in Article 229 paragraph (4), shall be punished with imprisonment of 5 (five) years and / or a fine 10,000,000 at most, 00 (ten million rupiahs). "

And the last paragraph i.e. (4) states, "In the case of an accident referred to in paragraph (3) which resulted in another person’s death, shall be punished with imprisonment of 6 (six) years and / or a fine of not more Rp12.000.000, 00 ( twelve million dollars). (Shohibul Umam / mh/Yazid.tr)

---