Registrar of the Constitutional Court on July 4, 2012 has received a letter from the applicant, dated July 2, 2012, which essentially revocation petition filed 59/PUU-X/2012 Number. Based on the statement on Monday (16/7) afternoon, the Constitutional Court (MK) dropped the provision that it grants the recall petition of the Petitioners.

That is the core provisions no. 59/PUU-X/2012, read by Chief Justice the Plenary Session of the Constitutional Court, Moh. Mahfud MD, at the Plenary Meeting Room, Constitutional Court, Jakarta. The Court reasoned determination according to law. "Therefore, the recall petition is granted," said Mahfud.

The petitioners in this case are Dominggus Luitnan Maurits, Suhardi Somomoelyono, Abdurahman Tardjo, Paul Pase, TB. Mansjur Abubakar, Umar Tuasikal, Hj. Metiawati, Shinta Marghiyana. They are testing this Act (Act) No. 16/2011 on Legal Assistance to the 1945 Constitution.

While the decree, the Court also said that after this ordinance should not be read by the Petitioners filed a petition for Formal returning Act (Act) No. 16/2011 on Legal Aid. "The applicant cannot resubmit the Application for Formal Testing of Act No. 16 of 2011 on Legal Aid," said Chairman of the Plenary Session.

Such a case based on Article 35 paragraph (1) and paragraph (2) Law no. 8 Year 2011 on Amendment of Law no. 24 of 2003 regarding the Constitutional Court stating, "The applicant may withdraw the application before or during the examination of the Constitutional Court made", and "The withdrawal referred to in paragraph (1) resulting application cannot be proposed again"

Please also note the preliminary hearing, the applicant assumes the rights and / or potentially harmed their constitutional authority by the Legal Aid Act. Due, the Legal Aid Act crashed with the Advocate Law.

"The way the establishment of legal aid legislation is not in accordance with Article 6 paragraph (1) item j of Law Number 12 Year 2011 on the establishment of legislation," said Dominggus.

Therefore, in his petition, the Petitioners ask the Court to declare the establishment of the Legal Aid Act does not meet the provisions of the Act by the 1945 formation, and has no binding legal force. (Shohibul Umam / mh/Yazid.tr)